Showing posts with label Calvinism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Calvinism. Show all posts

Thursday, May 18, 2017

Calvinism vs. Arminianism, according to The Babylon Bee

The Babylon Bee offers a brief explanation of the differences between Calvinism and Arminianism:
Calvinism: Theological framework that centers around God's sovereign choice in salvation. The points of Calvinism include total depravity, unconditional election, limited atonement, irresistible grace, perseverance of the saints, and being a condescending jerk.

Arminianism: Theology that focuses on man's free will to choose or reject God. The five points are kinda-sorta depravity, election but not really, errybody gets some atonement, grace that looks pretty cool but you can say no if you want to, and better hang onto that salvation pretty tightly.
You can always count on the Bee.

Thursday, September 03, 2015

Thursday, August 13, 2015

The over-intellectualizing of the Calvinist mind

Roger Olson discusses Christian anti-intellectualism in an article titled "Whatever Happened to the Christian Mind?" He writes:
The problem is not just one of ignorance as in "not knowing facts." That's bad enough. Too many Christians, including conservative-evangelical Christians, don't even know the Bible. How many can even find a book, chapter and verse in the Bible without being told the "page number in the pew Bible?" No, the larger problem is confusion of the Christian story with other stories. We live in a pluralistic culture and I celebrate that. But I also celebrate Christians in this pluralistic culture knowing and understanding their own story—the story of God and us told in the Bible.
He has a point. The problem with many churches is that they lack an intellectual and intelligent approach to scripture, where members of congregations are treated as if even the simplest of theological concepts are beyond their ability to grasp. I've been in churches where the sermons consist mostly of life lessons, illustrations, and humorous anecdotes, as if diving in and actively drawing out what God's word actually teaches would cause mass confusion. While Dr. Olson may not agree, I believe that anti-intellectualism is one of the trappings of Arminianism.

Then, of course, there is the opposite end of the spectrum.

The problem I have noticed in some Calvinist circles is over-intellectualizing. Let's be honest. Calvinism has a certain intellectual appeal that can sometimes cause us to focus on stimulating the brain at the expense of nurturing the soul. I confess that there have been times in my walk with Christ during which I was more drawn to theological discussions, books, web sites, and podcasts than God's word.

"Hey! Look at me! I'm learning new and wonderful things! Now let's see how many others I can convince of the doctrines of grace!"

If only more of us were just as passionate about the gospel.

This is not to disparage the desire to learn and expand our minds. After all, Christ himself commanded us to love God with all our heart, soul, and mind (Matthew 22:37).

Let's strive to find a healthy balance. If those books and podcasts we love so much don't cause us to develop a deeper thirst for the scriptures, then perhaps they have become little more than unhealthy distractions. Peter encouraged believers to "grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ" (2 Peter 3:18), and while that doesn't mean we can't partake in a little intellectual stimulation, we must realize there is no substitute for the word of God.

Sunday, August 31, 2014

Calvinism debate: Montgomery and Jones vs. Fischer and Zahnd

The following debate, moderated by Christianity Today editor Mark Galli, took place at Missio Dei Church in Chicago on August 27.

Proposition 1: Calvinism necessitates unconditional predestination, and unconditional predestination is incongruent with the God revealed in Jesus Christ.


Proposition 2: The cause of repentance and saving faith is not synergistic but monergistic.


Thanks to THEOparadox for the link.

Friday, April 11, 2014

PBS Profiles New Calvinism and the SBC

PBS ran this profile last week as part of its Religion & Ethics Newsweekly:


Read the transcript here.

Tuesday, March 11, 2014

A Call for Grace in the Midst of Controversy

Dr. James Galyon reminds us how important it is to remain gracious in the midst of controversy by posting a letter penned by John Newton:
John Newton (1725-1807)
Of all people who engage in controversy, we, who are called Calvinists, are most expressly bound by our own principles to the exercise of gentleness and moderation. If, indeed, they who differ from us have a power of changing themselves, if they can open their own eyes, and soften their own hearts, then we might with less inconsistency be offended at their obstinacy: but if we believe the very contrary to this, our part is, not to strive, but in meekness to instruct those who oppose. “If peradventure God will give them repentance to the acknowledgment of the truth.” If you write with a desire of being an instrument of correcting mistakes, you will of course be cautious of laying stumbling blocks in the way of the blind or of using any expressions that may exasperate their passions, confirm them in their principles, and thereby make their conviction, humanly speaking, more impracticable. ...

... If we act in a wrong spirit, we shall bring little glory to God, do little good to our fellow creatures, and procure neither honor nor comfort to ourselves. If you can be content with showing your wit, and gaining the laugh on your side, you have an easy task; but I hope you have a far nobler aim, and that, sensible of the solemn importance of gospel truths, and the compassion due to the souls of men, you would rather be a means of removing prejudices in a single instance, than obtain the empty applause of thousands. Go forth, therefore, in the name and strength of the Lord of hosts, speaking the truth in love; and may he give you a witness in many hearts that you are taught of God, and favored with the unction of his Holy Spirit.
Read the full post here.

Thursday, December 12, 2013

'The Calvinist': A Poem by John Piper


Marshall Segal of Desiring God writes:
If Calvinism isn't relevant for our life today — even the mundane details of our life — we should reject and ignore it. Sadly, I think most people make that judgment without ever really asking the question. What the Bible and the video above show so beautifully is that the sovereignty of God and his love for sinners relates to absolutely everything we do. Calvinism causes a hopeful, hard-working complete dependence on God and an undivided devotion to his glory in every area of life — marriage, parenting, school, vocation, failure, recreation, even death.

Saturday, November 30, 2013

Confession of a Calvinist Football Fan

(AP photo)

My theological football dilemma: As a Calvinist, I know the outcome of the game has already been foreordained, but I still find myself cheering on my team like an Arminian.

Monday, November 04, 2013

Saturday, June 30, 2012

The Parable of the Wicked Fireman: A "Refutation" of Calvinism

By uploading a few YouTube videos, Kerrigan Skelly has done something no one else has been able to do in hundreds of years: he has refuted Calvinism. Don't believe me? See for yourself:


I wonder how Mr. Skelly would answer my burning question for Arminians.

Tuesday, June 26, 2012

Saturday, June 16, 2012

How Some Arminians View the "God of Calvinism"

When did Roger Olson start writing for The Onion?:
Less than 24 hours after their god bestowed two delicious orange slices upon them, local ants reported the capricious deity had picked up the entire ant farm in which they live and shaken it violently, leaving many to wonder what they had done to incur the all-powerful being's deadly wrath. ...

... The deity, whom the ants know as "Marcus," has long been feared for his volatile and arbitrary behavior. Though he occasionally grants the insects small gifts of sugar water, sources said he routinely abandons the ant farm for days at a time, which sows chaos throughout the colony as hunger-driven hysteria rules its tunnels. Marcus has also been known to smite individual ants by concentrating the sun's rays into deadly beams with his mysterious lens of fire.
From the ants' point of view, it might be difficult to see the difference between Marcus and the Orkin Man.

Tuesday, June 05, 2012

Pelagianism in the SBC?

One has to wonder when some of the biggest names in the Southern Baptist Convention signed a statement containing the following:
We deny that Adam's sin resulted in the incapacitation of any person's free will or rendered any person guilty before he has personally sinned.
This has raised some serious concerns. John Aloisi writes:
Doctrinal statements mean something. And those who sign them should be very careful lest they end up affirming something contrary to Scripture. The authors of this recent statement claim to be putting forth the understanding of salvation held by the "vast majority" of Southern Baptists. I can only hope they are mistaken in this claim. In addition to disagreeing with the apostle Paul on the issue of original sin, the authors and signers have also staked out a position opposed to the original doctrinal statement of the flagship school of the Southern Baptist Convention. In 1858, the charter statement of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary required all professors to adhere to the Abstract of Principles. Article six of the Abstract affirms that Adam's descendants stand "under condemnation" before they become "actual transgressors." In other words, it affirms that humans are born guilty and liable to condemnation prior to the act of sinning. Apparently, a number of Southern Baptist leaders believe that the Abstract of Principles now lies outside the bounds of the "Traditional Southern Baptist" understanding of salvation.
It would appear some in the SBC are not only ignorant of scripture, they are ignorant of their own history.

Sunday, September 12, 2010

The Different Branches of Calvinism

What kind of Calvinist are you? Amyraldian, Infralapsarian, or Supralapsarian? Pastor Jason Robertson provides the following chart as a reference:

Amyraldism
"Low" Calvinism
Infralapsarianism
"Moderate" Calvinism
Supralapsarianism
"High" Calvinism
Decree to Create ManDecree to Create ManDecree Election and Reprobation
Decree to Allow FallDecree to Allow FallDecree to Allow Fall
Decree Atonement for all menDecree Election and ReprobationDecree Atonement for Elect
Decree Election and ReprobationDecree Atonement for ElectDecree to Create Man

(By the way, I fall into the Infralapsarian camp.)

Read more about the different theories here.

Tuesday, December 01, 2009

All Means All...

...and that's all all means. That's what most Arminians will argue when quoting verses like 2 Corinthians 5:14 and 1 Timothy 2:6.

But does all really mean all all the time? Let's take a look at a couple of examples:
  1. We all live on the third planet from the Sun.

  2. Let's all go out to dinner.
One of the preceding statements refers to all people everywhere, and one refers to all people of a particular group. So, yes, in these examples all really does mean all. You won't get any argument from me.

A couple more:
  1. All sunrises occur in the eastern sky because of the direction of the Earth's rotation.

  2. It's a great restaurant; I eat there all the time.
Both refer to how frequently a particular event occurs. One can be taken in a wooden, literal sense while the other should not. How we make the distinction depends on the context.

All clear? Good!

Thursday, June 11, 2009

Is Calvinism Becoming Too Worldly?

Dr. Peter Masters of the Metropolitan Tabernacle (yes, that Metropolitan Tabernacle) finally got around to reading Collin Hansen's book Young, Restless, Reformed. He didn't like it. In fact, in his latest article for Sword & Trowel, he writes that he "was very deeply saddened to read it, because it describes a seriously distorted Calvinism falling far, far short of an authentic life of obedience to a sovereign God. If this kind of Calvinism prospers, then genuine biblical piety will be under attack as never before."

He continues:
    The author of the book is a young man (around 26 when he wrote it) who grew up in a Christian family and trained in secular journalism. We are indebted to him for the readable and wide-reaching survey he gives of this new phenomenon, but the scene is certainly not a happy one.

    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.

    We are told of thunderous music, thousands of raised hands, "Christian" hip-hop and rap lyrics (the examples seeming inept and awkward in construction) uniting the doctrines of grace with the immoral drug-induced musical forms of worldly culture.
Contemporary music? Hip-hop? Oh, the horror!

Masters concludes, "The new Calvinism is not a resurgence but an entirely novel formula which strips the doctrine of its historic practice, and unites it with the world." That seems rather harsh.

Consider the following, written by Dr. Masters back in 2001:
    C. H. Spurgeon would never have an organ at the Metropolitan Tabernacle in his day, because he saw how so many of the larger churches had become carried away by the sound of their magnificent instruments, and the expert capabilities of their organists. They were tickling the ears of the people (as Spurgeon put it) with beautiful musical items other than hymns. He was concerned that people would go to church to be entertained rather than to worship, but even more seriously, he saw how the skill and beauty of the music was itself likely to be regarded as an act of worship, and an offering to God.

    Today the Tabernacle uses an organ, but we endeavour to keep its deployment within bounds, so that it provides an accompaniment only, and does not become a medium of worship. We would never say, for example, that the organ "enriches" worship. It disciplines the singing, and teaches and maintains the tune, but we know very well that in spiritual terms it can contribute nothing.
Couldn't the same be said of the singing itself, or any other form of musical worship for that matter? I cannot help but wonder what has changed to make the use of an organ in worship services perfectly acceptable. I also wonder what the Prince of Preachers might think of his church today.

Has Dr. Masters even listened to the music he is so quick to condemn? Has he considered the theological and biblical soundness of the lyrics? Or is it the music itself that's bad?

Of course, his article doesn't just focus on music. Masters sees a problem in that "the new Calvinism has found a way of uniting spiritually incompatible things at the same time." For example, he isn't too thrilled with the fact that the "charismatic" C. J. Mahaney is being embraced by big-name Calvinists like John Piper and John MacArthur. Talk about nitpicking.

What's interesting is that Masters apparently sees no problem uniting his own church with the world in other ways. For example, the Tabernacle's television ministry shares the airwaves with secular broadcasts. It maintains a web site on the porn-filled Internet. You can get books by Dr. Masters on Amazon.com, a site which also peddles sexually explicit, graphically violent, and anti-Christian material. Just where are we supposed to draw the line?

It is true that we aren't of the world, but we are still in it. Just because some of our musical tastes and preaching styles have changed over the years doesn't mean we are becoming one with the world.

Wednesday, October 29, 2008

Double Predestination

Mark Kielar discusses the doctrine of double predestination in this excerpt from the 16-part DVD series The Sovereignty of God.

Related Posts with Thumbnails