• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

The dislike of Calvinism may rest upon the attitude of Calvinists

Status
Not open for further replies.
I know the title of this thread is provocative, and probably raised the ire of many of you who have clicked on it for the purpose of seeing what vile and horrid things I may say about Calvinists. I want to assure you, I have no such intent. However, I do want those of you who consistently engage in debate with those who would challenge the revered doctrines of John Calvin to hopefully recognize yourself and seek to modify your behaviors. In exchange, I for one will admit to the truth of much of what Calvin taught, and vow to engage in fellowship rather than division.

There is a disturbing (to myself and other solid Southern Baptists) movement among the SBC elite that has been tagged with a catch-all name, the "Young, Restless and Reformed." They are dedicated to bringing Calvinism into the mainstream of the Southern Baptist Convention and making it the foremost teaching of the denomination to the detriment if not outright loss, as some feel, of the traditional understanding of salvation in the Baptist church as encompassed by the SBC membership.

Now, I want to say before I continue, I am far more Calvinist than I am willing to admit. When "confronted" by Calvinists who want to condemn me for "rejecting" the Doctrines of Grace as they understand them, I revert to a position that consistently is identified as Arminian by those with whom I discuss them. The problem is, I'm not anywhere close to Arminian. I firmly believe no man comes to Christ without the drawing, calling and empowerment of the Holy Spirit. I firmly believe that there is no salvation for one who is not so drawn, called, and empowered, that man has nothing within him that would allow him to "seek God." The natural man has no interest in seeking the Lord and Creator of the Universe. I am obviously the product of the teaching that led me to Christ, which is solidly Southern Baptist, and which, despite the opinions of Calvinists on this board and elsewhere, is very very close to being Calvinistic in nature.

All of this said, I want to get to the point of the the thread: The attitude of most people toward Calvinism has more to do with the mood and attitude of most Calvinists than it does with the solidly founded principles of Calvinist thought. Unfortunately, what I see is exactly what Dr. Paul Owen, a Calvinist in the Episcopalian denominations who teaches at Montreat College in North Carolina, detailed when he wrote a paper earlier this year titled "What is Wrong with the Young, Restless and Reformed Movement?". In a solidly grounded paper, Owen said:

Calvinism today seems to appeal mostly to a certain sort of personality, and that personality is not always healthy. I have discovered that the person who really spends a lot of time talking about the "doctrines of grace," tends to fit a typical profile. They tend to be male (rarely do you find women sitting around arguing about the details of TULIP), intellectually arrogant, argumentative, insecure (and therefore intolerant), and prone to constructing straw-man arguments. In order for the typical Calvinist's faith to remain secure, he seems to feel the need to imagine all others outside his theological box as evil, uninformed, or just plain stupid. I have seen this in men of all ages, some Baptist, some Presbyterian, some laymen, some ordained ministers.
The paper makes note of the tendency to equate the gospel itself with the Doctrines of Grace, and the awe some Calvinists express in speaking of when they "first accepted" those doctrines, as though they had somehow come to a deeper, richer understanding of the gospel. Some even claim that a dilution of the doctrines is somehow a dilution of the gospel. There are those on this board who express these thoughts.

Owen's critique gets pretty harsh, and many anti-Calvinists will heartily agree with his viewpoint. But rather than dwell on the negatives of the presentation of Calvinism from those who adhere to it, Owen moves on to express why the presentation is wrong. I include the bare essentials of his points below. Check out the link above to get his full arguments on these points.

  • Non-Calvinists are certainly correct when they note that Scripture everywhere confronts man with the obligation (not only the duty) and the opportunity to repent of his sins and believe the gospel of the true God (Acts 17:27, 30) ...
  • Non-Calvinists are correct to see conversion as an active movement of the will of man, and not merely a passive reception of the gift of faith. God's grace does not exclude consent and a cooperative response on the part of man ...
  • Since this is the case, there is no reason for Calvinists to continually shy away from language which includes man's free consent and cooperation in conversion ...
  • ... we not "dead" in trespasses and sins (Eph. 2:1)? How can a dead corpse do anything to contribute to his conversion? We often hear Reformed people talking like this. But it's a bad argument, and needs to be set aside by Calvinists who wish to speak biblically on these matters ...
  • Non-Calvinists are correct to insist that God gives sufficient grace to everyone so as to constitute a real opportunity to respond to the summons of the gospel. Whenever men hear the gospel, it is truly possible for them to put to good use their natural faculties in the process of conversion ...
  • Note also how 1 Peter 1:23-25 attributes regeneration ("since you have been born again") to "the good news that was preached to you." Who is the "you" here? Clearly, the good news was not only preached to the elect, but to elect and non-elect. And yet regeneration is directly attributed to this preached word (not simply to the Spirit's secret operation in the elect) ...
  • Non-Calvinists often raise points that make better sense of numerous other texts of Scripture. Why would Stephen fault those who are "uncircumcised in heart" (i.e., unregenerate) for "resisting the Holy Spirit" (Acts 7:51), unless cooperating with the Holy Spirit could produce a circumcised heart (i.e., regeneration)? ...
I am sure this thread will be divisive and engender arguments, and I truly wish it would not. What I hope here is that we see each other for who we truly are in Christ: A new creation, beyond condemnation, His workmanship, a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for His own possession, who may proclaim the excellencies of Him who called us out of darkness into His marvelous light.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

quantumfaith

Active Member
I know the title of this thread is provocative, and probably raised the ire of many of you who have clicked on it for the purpose of seeing what vile and horrid things I may say about Calvinists. I want to assure you, I have no such intent. However, I do want those of you who consistently engage in debate with those who would challenge the revered doctrines of John Calvin to hopefully recognize yourself and seek to modify your behaviors. In exchange, I for one will admit to the truth of much of what Calvin taught, and vow to engage in fellowship rather than division.

There is a disturbing (to myself and other solid Southern Baptists) movement among the SBC elite that has been tagged with a catch-all name, the "Young, Restless and Reformed." They are dedicated to bringing Calvinism into the mainstream of the Southern Baptist Convention and making it the foremost teaching of the denomination to the detriment if not outright loss, as some feel, of the traditional understanding of salvation in the Baptist church as encompassed by the SBC membership.

Now, I want to say before I continue, I am far more Calvinist than I am willing to admit. When "confronted" by Calvinists who want to condemn me for "rejecting" the Doctrines of Grace as they understand them, I revert to a position that consistently is identified as Arminian by those with whom I discuss them. The problem is, I'm not anywhere close to Arminian. I firmly believe no man comes to Christ without the drawing, calling and empowerment of the Holy Spirit. I firmly believe that there is no salvation for one who is not so drawn, called, and empowered, that man has nothing within him that would allow him to "seek God." The natural man has no interest in seeking the Lord and Creator of the Universe. I am obviously the product of the teaching that led me to Christ, which is solidly Southern Baptist, and which, despite the opinions of Calvinists on this board and elsewhere, is very very close to being Calvinistic in nature.

All of this said, I want to get to the point of the the thread: The attitude of most people toward Calvinism has more to do with the mood and attitude of most Calvinists than it does with the solidly founded principles of Calvinist thought. Unfortunately, what I see is exactly what Dr. Paul Owen a Calvinist in the Episcopalian denominations who teaches at Montreal College in North Carolina, when he wrote a paper earlier this year titled "What is Wrong with the Young, Restless and Reformed Movement?" in which Owen said:

The paper makes note of the tendency to equate the gospel itself with the Doctrines of Grace, and the awe some Calvinists express in speaking of when they "first accepted" those doctrines, as though they had somehow come to a deeper, richer understanding of the gospel. Some even claim that a dilution of the doctrines is somehow a dilution of the gospel. There are those on this board who express these thoughts.

Owen's critique gets pretty harsh, and many anti-Calvinists will heartily agree with his viewpoint. But rather than dwell on the negatives of the presentation of Calvinism from those who adhere to it, Owen moves on to express why the presentation is wrong. I include the bare essentials of his points below. Check out the link above to get his full arguments on these points.

I am sure this thread will be divisive and engender arguments, and I truly wish it would not. What I hope here is that we see each other for who we truly are in Christ: A new creation, beyond condemnation, His workmanship, a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for His own possession, who may proclaim the excellencies of Him who called us out of darkness into His marvelous light.

Great post, appreciate your honesty and openness. Blessings
 

Revmitchell

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
The dislike of Calvinism may rest upon the attitude of Calvinists

uh......ya think?


By the way since you have opposed Calvinists on this board you now must be destroyed.

Let's just hope James White doesn't find out or you will really be in trouble.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Bro. Curtis

<img src =/curtis.gif>
Site Supporter
I, too, and convinced a lot of Calvinism is 100% correct. It's their attitude when asked simple questions that really turn me off into looking further into it. That, and…..

I believe we CAN resist grace.
I also believe the atonement is not limited.
 

evangelist6589

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Yup, I also agree. Which makes us heretics, among many Calvinists. But as brothers in Christ, they and we need to come to the conclusion that these differences do not negate that brotherhood.

Not really. Your problem is your inability to read the books of Calvinists, or at least comprehend what they teach. I nor do most Reformed that I know will call one a heretic for believing in a universal atonement. I myself do not know if the atonement was Limited or not. However I do believe that Christ tasted death for everyman, but the special call of election goes only to the elect. However I still preach the gospel and offer salvation to everyone that God puts in my way and I have a gospel tract in my hand. However the elect cannot resist the call to salvation that the Holy Spirit has birthed. You do not believe this, but believe one can reject the call. You are wrong, but that does not make you a heretic.
 

evangelist6589

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I, too, and convinced a lot of Calvinism is 100% correct. It's their attitude when asked simple questions that really turn me off into looking further into it. That, and…..

I believe we CAN resist grace.
I also believe the atonement is not limited.

Brother its called CONVICTION. I am CONVICTED that modern evangelicalism is largely humanistic. You may call me arrogant and divisive, but I must stand by the scriptures. People are headed to Hell and people are being deceived by false teachers and books. I must speak out!!!!

Yes I am sure I have made some in my former churches singles ministry mad at me because I have spoken out against the new way they are running the nursing home which is to take out the mention of SIN, the call to REPENTANCE and so on. I tried to be gentle, but in the end they deny the sufficiency of the scriptures and the sovereignty of God in salvation and I called a bunch of them on that one! As a result many left the FB chat, and not a single reply to my messages.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
And there you have it. The first indication that those who are not Cals are stupid. Be sure that there will be more.
Beat me to it, but exactly what I was going to post, with the caveat that I would now hesitate to call myself a "non-Calvinist" but more in disagreement with strict, blind adherence to what passes for Calvinism today. His outburst represents the exact reaction I was asking supporters of Calvinistic thought as it is commonly expressed today to avoid.
 

evangelist6589

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
uh......ya think?


By the way since you have opposed Calvinists on this board you now must be destroyed.

Let's just hope James White doesn't find out or you will really be in trouble.

James White can be very arrogant and divisive. I like his teachings and books, but not necessarily his attitude. However I'd rather have him over many Arminian whom do not peach the gospel, yet are loving and non divisive. I am talking about people like Andy Stanley and Joel Osteen. People whom have a better attitude than James White, but do not preach the full gospel. What would you rather have? I would rather have the pastor whom has an attitude problem, and is divisive, but at least he peaches the gospel.
 

evangelist6589

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Beat me to it, but exactly what I was going to post, with the caveat that I would now hesitate to call myself a "non-Calvinist" but more in disagreement with strict, blind adherence to what passes for Calvinism today. His outburst represents the exact reaction I was asking supporters of Calvinistic thought as it is commonly expressed today to avoid.

Did I call you a heretic? No. You did put words into the mouth of Reformed by saying that we all would call you a heretic.

Granted I know people on FB that would call you a heretic an they would call Charles Stanley a heretic as well. However they are DEAD wrong and have taken their Calvinism to a divisive low. I have argued against these Hyper-calvinists before in your defense.
 

Revmitchell

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
James White can be very arrogant and divisive. I like his teachings and books, but not necessarily his attitude. However I'd rather have him over many Arminian whom do not peach the gospel, yet are loving and non divisive. I am talking about people like Andy Stanley and Joel Osteen. People whom have a better attitude than James White, but do not preach the full gospel. What would you rather have? I would rather have the pastor whom has an attitude problem, and is divisive, but at least he peaches the gospel.

I don't know where you heard things about Stanley but they are you are wrong.

Anyway How about let's have neither it is not an either or scenario and there is more theological persuasions out there other than cal and arm.
 
Did I call you a heretic? No. You did put words into the mouth of Reformed by saying that we all would call you a heretic.
Did I say you called me a heretic? Or did I identify anyone specifically that did? No.

Granted I know people on FB that would call you a heretic an they would call Charles Stanley a heretic as well. However they are DEAD wrong and have taken their Calvinism to a divisive low. I have argued against these Hyper-calvinists before in your defense.
Then why are you getting so upset with me? Curtis and I spoke generally, and my response to RevMitchell simply reflected a truth: That the initial reaction from the Calvinist/Reformed camp was an attack. Can you deny you personally affronted me in your response? And again, I asked that not be the response, that we have discussion.
 

Rippon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
those who would challenge the revered doctrines of John Calvin
John Calvin is not the source of our doctrine -- it is the Word of God.
I firmly believe no man comes to Christ without the drawing, calling and empowerment of the Holy Spirit. I firmly believe that there is no salvation for one who is not so drawn, called, and empowered, that man has nothing within him that would allow him to "seek God." The natural man has no interest in seeking the Lord and Creator of the Universe.
Good. Then you would object to what Dr. Owen said:"God gives sufficient grace to everyone so as to constitute a real opportunity to respond to the summons of the gospel."
Dr. Paul Owen, a Calvinist in the Episcopalian denominations who teaches at Montreat College in North Carolina,
Dr.Paul Owen is not so Calvinistic in my estimation. He falls somewhat shy of the John Owen standard shall I say?

What I hope here is that we see each other for who we truly are in Christ: A new creation, beyond condemnation, His workmanship, a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for His own possession, who may proclaim the excellencies of Him who called us out of darkness into His marvelous light.
I can certainly amen the above.
 

Thousand Hills

Active Member

Thousand Hills

Active Member
I am sure this thread will be divisive and engender arguments, and I truly wish it would not. What I hope here is that we see each other for who we truly are in Christ: A new creation, beyond condemnation, His workmanship, a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for His own possession, who may proclaim the excellencies of Him who called us out of darkness into His marvelous light.

Along with Rippon, I can give this a big thumbs up :thumbs: :godisgood: :jesus:
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
All of this said, I want to get to the point of the the thread: The attitude of most people toward Calvinism has more to do with the mood and attitude of most Calvinists than it does with the solidly founded principles of Calvinist thought. Unfortunately, what I see is exactly what Dr. Paul Owen, a Calvinist in the Episcopalian denominations who teaches at Montreat College in North Carolina, detailed when he wrote a paper earlier this year titled "What is Wrong with the Young, Restless and Reformed Movement?". In a solidly grounded paper, Owen said:

The paper makes note of the tendency to equate the gospel itself with the Doctrines of Grace, and the awe some Calvinists express in speaking of when they "first accepted" those doctrines, as though they had somehow come to a deeper, richer understanding of the gospel. Some even claim that a dilution of the doctrines is somehow a dilution of the gospel. There are those on this board who express these thoughts.

Great article (one of the best on the topic I’ve read in some time). Owen is absolutely correct that there are some Calvinists (hopefully a small minority) who hold TULIP as their operating center - and “cult” is an apt term.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

JohnDeereFan

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I know the title of this thread is provocative, and probably raised the ire of many of you who have clicked on it for the purpose of seeing what vile and horrid things I may say about Calvinists. I want to assure you, I have no such intent.

Well, you'll be the first, champ.

However, I do want those of you who consistently engage in debate with those who would challenge the revered doctrines of John Calvin to hopefully recognize yourself and seek to modify your behaviors.
e]

I like the way you say "the revered doctrines of John Calvin", as though our doctrine is based around Calvin and not the Word of God, and then tell us to "modify our behavior".

There is a disturbing (to myself and other solid Southern Baptists) movement among the SBC elite that has been tagged with a catch-all name, the "Young, Restless and Reformed." They are dedicated to bringing Calvinism into the mainstream of the Southern Baptist Convention and making it the foremost teaching of the denomination to the detriment if not outright loss, as some feel, of the traditional understanding of salvation in the Baptist church as encompassed by the SBC membership.

Oy gevalt! Sound doctrine in the SBC! We can't have that!

The attitude of most people toward Calvinism has more to do with the mood and attitude of most Calvinists

Sorry, having come from the cesspool that is OnlineBaptist and having had to deal with the Finneyists here, I'm not buying it.
 

evangelist6589

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter

Revmitchell

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top