WARNING: It appears as though Calvinism is on the rise and there are many that are not happy about it.
I have been a Christian for thirteen years and only within the last two years have I accepted Calvinism as fundamental to true Christianity. Prior to that, I had no knowledge or understanding of what it was or what it meant to be a Calvinist. Sadly, a lot of my ignorance about Calvinism was due to the fact that Calvary Chapel, as a movement/denomination are very insular. It is my opinion that in their attempt to reach the masses they have forsaken in-depth study including a comparative study of theology and eschatology. For about ten years of my Christian life I knew nothing other than what Calvary Chapel taught. Now I am an anomaly in my church, since I am a professed Calvinist, Amillennialist and an Orthodox-Preterist(partial). I no longer teach the youth as I had done for five years.
Calvinism has been misunderstood, vilified and misrepresented not just by Calvary Chapel but the SBC and other groups as well. Chuck Smith, founder of the Calvary Chapel movement has previously referred to Calvinism as blasphemous and a satanic doctrine, prior to his death Dr. Jerry Falwell said that Calvinism was heretical. In the past, Norm Geisler has called Calvinism “divine rape” but has stopped doing that of late. One of the worst anti-Calvinists is Dave Hunt who willingly and knowingly prints lies about Calvinism.
So now what? I hope this article is not a sign of things to come. Are the anti-Calvinists going to turn to emotional appeals to try and refute Calvinism? My Fide-O homies Scott and Jason recently commented on this article on their site. You Tube is replete with armchair theologians that are “preaching” a works salvation yet have the audacity to call Calvinism a heresy. I have done a three part rebuttal(part1, part2, part3) of one of these people, I even invited him to my blog but he refused to respond to my rebuttal. The single worst anti-Calvinist has got to be this guy, grasshopperjax on You Tube. The single worst attempt at refuting Calvinism I have heard. I was going to go through and refute his lame videos but I have yet to be able to sit through a single video without throwing up, even though they are less than ten minutes long. I also fear that I may have to explain the time I wasted watching these videos on the day of judgment.
Just out of curiosity by, “fundamental to true Christianity” do you mean essential? In other words do you believe that non-calvinists are non-christians.
Thanks for the comment, Zach.
No not at all. I do not think that non-Calvinists or Arminians are not Christian. I do not think that you need to hold to the Doctrines of Grace to be saved.
Cool, I have often wondered how united the Calvary Chapel guys were on the issue of Calvinism. Bob Coy at Ft. Lauderdale seems a bit torn on the issue.
Hello,
Thank you for your defense of Calvinism in what can be a hostile environment. My wife and I came out of Calvary Chapel some years ago due to un-sound teaching. We became Reformed (Calvinists) after that and have had a very hard time finding a church. We have found a church that may fit us although it is Dispensational and I am thinking 4 point Calvinist with limited atonement most likely the problem. I hope they are interested in the truth of God’s Word. It seems much of the problem is ignorance of what Calvinisim actually teaches.
Here is quote by Spurgeon regarding Calvinism:”Calvinism is the gospel, and nothing else.”(http://www.spurgeon.org/calvinis.htm)
Again thank you for your stand.
Zach, you can’t be a Calvinist and be a pastor at a Calvary Chapel. I know of a CC in California that were going through the book of Romans and nearly lost their affiliation because the pastor was leaning towards Calvinism. Chuck Smith had to personally speak with the pastor. There are a few stories on the net about other pastors that had run into some problems with the CC hierarchy because of their views.
Gjyshi, thanks for coming by!
Wow, I didn’t know that. It’s hard to understand how a denomination so committed to expositional preaching can be so anti-Calvinistic.
Zach, if you click on the link I have above about Chuck Smith calling Calvinism heretical and satanic, you will find out just how anti-Calvinist they are. The audio is from The Dividing Line, a webcast done twice a week by Dr. James White. Dr. White begins the critique of Chuck Smith’s comments about fifteen minutes into the show.
Hi,
This is my first comment here, but I’ve been reading your posts for a few months (I think) now. I found your blog through JMB’s Bible design site. I thought you may be interested in reading JP Holding’s articles on TULIP (keep in mind he is not a Calvinist). It may be “anti-” Calvinist, but at least it is fair and not just rhetoric.
http://www.tektonics.org/tulip/tulipsum.html
Dave
Dave,
Thanks for the link. I am familiar with JPH, fair and not a lot of rhetoric.
Jesus,
I too found your blog through JMB’s site…good stuff, I really enjoy the blog.
I didn’t realize we had two things in common: Calvary Chapel and Calvinism. I live in South Florida and went to a couple younger Calvaries, one of which was a church plant off of Coy’s MegaCalvary in Ft. Lauderdale. I’ve since found that not all Calvaries are equal. They pretty much let anyone become a pastor and it’s no surprise that they’re having major issues doctrinally – in part because they’ve been too loosy goosy and are “nondemoninational.” The last Calvary I went to had a bunch of young pastors running it who idolized Rob Bell and McLaren and spent more time trying to come up with catchy titles and media clips than preaching the whole counsel of God. They changed their name, dropping the Chapel part and adding an emergentesque ending to it.
I left and started going to an Independant Baptist Church where the majority of the staff are Arminian but one of the associate pastors turned me to John Piper and Desiring God. After years of hearing all the Dave Hunt anti-Calvinist rhetoric at Calvary Chapels, I finally wrestled with the doctrine, looked at Scripture, and had an epiphany of sorts. It’s been a great ride ever since.
Matt
Matt, thanks for the comments.
I had no idea what Calvinism was until a friend from church told me about a webcast called The Narrow Mind. At that time I was developing an interest in apologetics and Pastor Gene Cook, Jr. did shows on apologetics. He is a Calvinist, and whenever he would speak on it I would furrow my brow and think that it wasn’t what I knew Christianity was. I turned to my Bible to refute what he was talking about but the more I tried, the more I was convicted that is was biblically sound.
Long story short, I now consider myself Reformed and Pastor Gene Cook my homeboy.
I realize that this conversation has long since ceased. But I want to let everyone know that I am currently doing a video series refutting Al’s(grrasshopperjax) videos on calvinism. Actually grasshopperjax videos are not about calvinism because he misrepresents our position grossly and irresponsibly. My video series will be called “What misrepresentation is this?” It will show snippets of not only grasshopperjax, but Dave Hunt, offline111, nodeceit, tlthe5th, and heretics such as Dan Corner. Please watch out. I’m on Part III right now. God bless
Mark, thanks for the comment!
PLease be sure to update me about your videos, I will post them here!
FYI: You mention the SBC as coming out as being “anti-Calvinist.” Bear in mind, while there are many within the SBC who are just that, there are also many within the SBC who are not, including yours truly.
Rev,
didn’t mean for it sound as thought the SBC was primarily anti-Calvinist. As far as I know, the SBC has yet to take stance regarding the issue. My homies, Jason and Scot from the Fide-O blog are SBC pastors but they hold to the Covenants of Grace.
I am a Calvinist and I am glad I am a victim of Divine Rape. Better to be raped than burned.
I am about to undergo a thorough “lashing” for being a Calvinist believer. I have been teaching the Bible in a particular fellowship to an older group of men for about 5 years now. I am happy to say that for almost all the class members, the former Arminian leanings are now replaced with the glorious Doctrines of Grace. For about 4 of those years, we enjoyed a Pastor who also was a Calvinist. We now have an interim pastor, and he preaches against Calvinism. Although he has not yet preached Dispensationalism, three organizations of which he has been or is a member have statements of belief that include the dispensational model.
I will most probably end up leaving the fellowship, and it is going to hurt very much.
But I think I can connect the hatred for John Calvin with the Dispensationalism and the ugly conduct that proceeds from those that hold onto Dispensationalism.
I found an article by Charles Spurgeon that he had written in his “Sword and Trowell” entitled “There Be Some That Trouble You.” He published this in 1867. In this article he describes the then very new dispensational theory and the character of the folks preaching it. Nothing has changed. If you want the website that carries this article, let me know. (I am not sure you allow links in this format.)
So I think the overwhelming ungracious attitudes attacking Calvinists are wrought by association with dispensationalism. (Yes, I have experienced the same ungracious attitudes from Calvinists who also adopt dispensationalism.)
“Salvation is of the Lord!”
Joe V.
Hey Joe, (where you goin’ with that gun in your hand)
post the link!
Jesus,
My post s do not go through.
Joe V.
Jesus,
The one’s with the links do not go through.
Joe V.
There Be Some That Trouble You
http://www.spurgeon.org/s_and_t/disp1867.htm
The Darby Brethren
http://www.spurgeon.org/s_and_t/dbreth2.htm
Plymouth Brethren
http://www.spurgeon.org/s_and_t/pb.htm
Hi,
Just a note from a fellow reformed calvary chapelite. I go to CC in Boston,MA. After talking to several christians there about what calvinism is and how it differs from what CC teaches, I was told by the assoc. pastor to not speak of calvinism again as it tends to “confuse” people. This happened after a brief meeting between me and Norman Giesler, who had just finished speaking there about the emerging church. I have decided to obey and not speak of calvinism unless asked about it. I’ll do this out of respect for him, but like R.C. Sproul said “I will not let truth die in the streets for the sake of peace, I cannot.”
blessings, nick
Nick – I encourage you to seriously reconsider your decision to keep silent to gain a false peace sought by those who believe otherwise. For if the doctrines of grace are true, then you need to preach them from the roof-top because none of God’s word are to be laid aside so we can gain the approval of men who gnash their teeth at this, or any doctrine.
Personally, I did this in my own life with a brother whom I was very close to. Basically, after I came to believe these truths (before we were defenders of Arminiasm!) he in no uncertain words commanded me to be silent; to not speak of this doctrine, because he didn’t understood it, didn’t want to learn it, and subsequently hated the doctrine.
And remain silent I did for three long years ever quenching the Spirit whenever my heart was pricked. I even remember a time in particular when he was praying a prayer that was to the effect, “Lord, please get everything out of my uncle’s life that is a hindrance to him believing so he can make a ‘free will’ decision to accept Jesus.” I kid not. I cannot tell you the angst that was in my heart, but I kept silent once again.
Three long years passed and I could no longer go on living the lie and quenching the Spirit any longer. I wrote my brother a long. very gracious letter simply stating what I believed and that I was not going to be silent any more. I shared some excellent papers and a host of Scriptures to explain my position. We spoke once after that and then sadly never again. Not because I would not have met with him, but only because I would not be muzzled.
Never, by God’s grace, will I do that again. So I ask you to consider whom you are serving for if it be the Lord, then serve him and preach what you believe to be truth. If we think that the truth is not going to cause “confusion” or contention, we are kidding ourselves.
In Christ
bro Michael
Michael, Nick,
I am surprised to see your more recent posts. I was looking at “old” links, when I came across your comments. I am the same Joe that initially wrote in this blog July 29, 2008. I can now finish the story I began.
The interim pastor and all the deacons pressed hard to disallow my membership. They all left in one week even though the congregation voted to keep them in “office.” We now are installing a new Pastor on May 24. He is totally reformed. I stayed instead of leaving; this was my resistance to the pressure. God moved. His Word is greater than men’s fiction. The Doctrines of Grace are understood by those who know the real peace that Christ gives. Men’s decisions are man-centered. God decisions are not avoided.
Salvation is of the Lord!
Joe V.
Wow! Interesting story. And I hear it repeated all too often. Welcome to the “club” of former Calvary Chapel members who found themselves forced to leave due to Chuck Smith’s theological demagoguery.
I think it was Danny Bond who was teaching what sounded to “Calvinistic” to Mr. Smith which required his “intervention”!Too funny… and yet sad.
I remember CC’s beginnings. I remember the plaques prominently displayed in the their entry foyers when they were first started. It was a quote from Philip Melancthon (a great Reformer), which states “In Essentials – Unity; In non-Essentials – Liberty; but in all things CHARITY.”.
Now, so many years later, and corresponding to their phenomenal growth: Their true spirit has come to the fore, and those cherished sentiments have quietly been removed, and it’s Author denounced.
I spent MANY years with CC, and served in many capacities, the last of which was I suppose what one could call an “elder” though they truly do NOT have such in the Biblical sense. Neither do they have “membership” since that would threaten the CONTROL of “the direction” of the Church.
Looking back, and re-examining these things, I can only liken it to a “Protestant Papacy”, where Chuck Smith is the Pope. Who will succeed him is anyone’s guess. I suppose that one day we shall see the white smoke rise from “Maranantha Village”, and we will know. But be sure to know…he will be NO “Calvinist”. And his reckless denouncements of Calvinism, like Chuck’s, will be treated as “ex-Cathedra”.
What is lost here is that calvinism and arminianism are not the two choices presented in scripture. In fact, “right division” is presented by the Apostle Paul.
For example, calvinism teaches perseverance and arminianism teaches the possibility of losing salvation. Both are easily refuted, since Paul teaches the sealing of the believer and the bible is replete of truly saved people who fell away-either morally or doctrinally.
Instead, the bible teaches preservation, not perseverance.
Perhaps by studying in the King James you will find the meaning of the word dispensational, since Paul USES it there. Much confusion results for various reasons, but a poster above says he figured things out in a couple years. Usually it takes years and years of contemplative thought to flesh out these issues, and not an “either or” position you should arrive at.
One thing that is misunderstood is that Christ died for SIN, not just SINS. Thus, in order to accomplish redemption for even one person He had to die for all-universally. Thus, at the heart of God’s invitation is the fact that Christ died for YOUR sins and that you have a choice before you—–this is not the same as having a “free will” (or self-determination over your life).
The good news is that Christ died for YOUR sins, thats the message. Otherwise, a hypercalvinist is really equipped with BAD news for most people. This is not biblical. And by the way, Spurgeon was not a hypercalvinist. He believed in universal atonement. Even Calvin himself contradicted himself multiple times on several key “calvinist” issues. The Westminster Confession “corrected” these contradictions into a codified
doctrine.
I can tell you that hypercalvinist believe is errant but it appeals to a proud arrogant mind quite often: “I’m one of the elect”! Instead we should focus on Gods’ sovereignty in light of the fact that He is not limited in His thinking like we are.
He is sovereign…..which means He can give people a CHOICE……if He sovereignly chooses to do so. Hypercalvinists actually misguidedly limit that choice in their attempt to “help” God out. John MacArthur does the same thing when he tries to help God “weed out” believers who are not 100 percent “sold out”. This negates the free nature of the gift.
It then becomes by grace through faith plus commitment instead of by grace through faith ALONE.