If my pastor is a Calvinist and I'm not, should I change churches?

[Pipedude]

"Calvin said this, Calvin said that . . . If thats all I heard my preacher say Sunday after Sunday after Sunday

Ehhhh, just to be fair, Blackbird, Calvinist preachers don't do that. They get their material straight from the Bible, they just interpret it a little differently.

 

[Tom Butler]

I am neither Calvinist nor Arminian----but do rather preach the whole council of the Lord---the pure doctrine of God

BUT if I were an average church member and thats all that I ever heard from my pastor

"Calvin said this, Calvin said that!! According to Calvin!! In Calvin's book on page 333 paragraph 2"

If thats all I heard my preacher say Sunday after Sunday after Sunday---it wouldn't take me long to find another church to attend before the next Sunday

Know what I mean????

I've had a bunch of non-Cal pastors and a couple of Cals. Not once have I ever heard the Cal pastors cite John Calvin in either their teaching or preaching.

Nor did they ever preach a sermon on Calvinism. However, everybody knew where they stood.

 

[JerryL]

I've had a bunch of non-Cal pastors and a couple of Cals. Not once have I ever heard the Cal pastors cite John Calvin in either their teaching or preaching.

Nor did they ever preach a sermon on Calvinism. However, everybody knew where they stood.

True. I have never heard Calvin mentioned in any sermon in my life.

 

[David Lamb]

....Someone mentioned outreach, but for some reason our pastor is not particularly interested in outreach. His basic stance is that we are here and our doors are open.

In Christ,
Dee

He may call himself a calvinist, but if your pastor really has that attitude, he is displaying hypercalvinism, not calvinism. There are quite a few members of the Baptist Board (including myself) whose theology is calvinistic, yet who put outreach/evangelism very high on their agenda. I found the following distinction between calvinism and hypercalvinism, on the web at: http://www.monergism.com/directory/link_category/HyperCalvinism/

Arminianism and Hyper-Calvinism were both among the historical errors battled by Charles Spurgeon, who was himself a 5-point Calvinist. He vigilantly fought these twin errors on both sides of the spectrum. One of Hyper-Calvinism's main errors is to declare that, because of God's sovereignty, we should not evangelize the lost. Spurgeon rejected such nonsense as do the large majority of people who would call themselves Calvinists today.​

I know you said you did not want this to turn into a Cal - non Cal debate but unless we agree on what we mean by the terms we use, we are going to have a very frustrating time. (That is a general observation, and certainly not a criticism of your OP).


A Happy and "spiritually-settled" New Year to you!

 

[blackbird]

Don't let it get to you. It isn't a life-or-death issue. Bitsy was right when she wrote "Calvinist and non-Calvinists have been worshiping side-by-side for ages." There are some people who make it a test of fellowship, but those of us who don't are happier, as a rule.

But I still think that Calvinism deserves it own forum. :love2:

I agree here----I am not a "Calvinist" (nor am I Arminian)but I have a dear friend who is(a Calvinist)-----one of my dearest "preacher buddies"----he's probably done more to encourage me to "stay the course" in my preaching ministry than any other "Non-Cal" I know!!

This same preacher buddy---at one particular church he was in----was treated like the "slime of the earth"----reason I knew---it was all over the county how the church treated him

One particular day I was visiting him in his home(church parsonage)---I walked in and it was freezin' cold----I asked him "Dude--does your heat work??"

It worked---but he had to pay the electric bill out of his salary so he had it set low

I noticed he had a wood burning heater----"Dude! You burn wood in that heater???"

Turns out he did----BUT the deacons were responsible for having the wood cut for him----and they had been particularly lazy about it

The next day----he had a cord of wood sitting neatly stacked up outside ready to burn----his supplier??? His "Non-Calvinist" preacher friend!!!

The reason we don't have a Calvin forum is because of the "Carnal" behaviour sometimes put on exibition!!!!!

 

[David Lamb]

If the doctrine is adversely affecting your church and your own spiritual growth, such as, you are not being taught a concern or love for those who don't have Christ as their Savior because the pastor is a 5-point Calvinist who has no concern for the lost, then I would consider departing.

I hope you were not making the (false) equation:

5-point calvinist = no concern for lost sinners.

​

To quote the song, "It ain't necessarily so!" In fact it ain't so at all! Such thinking (no concern for the lost) has, sadly, happened, but it is not calvinism - it is hypercalvinism.
Happy New Year!

 

[mcdirector]

I've been in lots of churches. I've never heard Calvin mentioned either. In many, I couldn't tell whether the pastor was a Calvinist or not from his sermons - I had to get to know the man outside of the Sunday morning setting.

Being a Calvinist doesn't equate with non-mission-mindess. This above any other thing mentioned in this thread would heavily lead me to consider moving memberships.

William Carey must be rolling in his grave.

 

[Bob Alkire]

Not all but a lot of the Calvinist churches around here will tell you they are Calvinist or reformed in their phone book add or the sign out front. one of the 5 or 6 largest churches around here is a Calvinist church and what I would call pentecostal or CCM music. I went one time and heard , Jesus is the Son of Mary for about 9 min. and left, they were still going on with their song. As of yet I've never heard their pastor preach but he is getting quite a large group.

 

[blackbird]

I've been in lots of churches. I've never heard Calvin mentioned either. In many, I couldn't tell whether the pastor was a Calvinist or not from his sermons - I had to get to know the man outside of the Sunday morning setting.

Being a Calvinist doesn't equate with non-mission-mindess. This above any other thing mentioned in this thread would heavily lead me to consider moving memberships.

William Carey must be rolling in his grave.

Not taking anything from Bitsy's post---but the question is for all readers---both Calvinist and Non-----heres the Q------Then why are we worried about whos calvinist and who isn't????

 

[Bob Alkire]

Not taking anything from Bitsy's post---but the question is for all readers---both Calvinist and Non-----heres the Q------Then why are we worried about whos calvinist and who isn't????

For the most part I'm not and I don't think most are, however it is a problem when a pastor comes in and does not say what his theology is( and I believe it is on the search group to find this out and we will in the future) and then after 5 or 6 years try and bring in a different theology than of the church.

I think the problem is when a person is militant over their theology and put down everyone who disagrees with him. I'm not Calvinistic and don't bring it up but if ask if I believe such and such, I'll give an answer.

 

[pinoybaptist]

Pinoybaptist, I apologize. Because this is a Baptist board, I was under the impression I could come here and find brothers and sisters in Christ who would at the very least, understand that this is a sincere spiritual dilemma for me. I love this man, and this is a fundamental difference in our respective interpretations of the gospel. We're not talking about sprinkling vs. dunking here. If I were the type to leave because I don't like or agree with the preacher I would have done so when the other 60% of our membership left. And this would not have been my home church for over 40 years.

Thanks to all who offered helpful, non-sarcastic responses. I will continue to pray and ask for the Holy Spirit's guidance.

In Christ,
Dee

Willowdee:

I am equally as sorry for my caustic remark and offer my sincerest apologies. I wrote that while having just finished conversing with a caller (I work in a call center) who thought that just because we were his Internet Service Provider every problem he has with his computer, OS to browser, is our concern and when I told him I can't help him with a router he bought and connected to our modem he called me every conceivable four letter cuss word you can think of, and made me feel like all I've ever fed my family came from duping people.

At any rate, my civil answer will be this:

As long as he preaches Christ and him crucified, God Holy and man sinful, whether he is a Calvinist or not should be of no concern to you.

Calvinism is his theology. When he dies he leaves Calvinism behind. When a Calvinist, Arminian, or Primitive Baptist such as myself dies, God will not hand out questions and quizzes in heaven to see who gives the best answer.

There are people on this board, and other boards, who treat and speak of Calvinists like they were the spawn of Satan himself, leprous, hateworthy people whom Christians should have nothing to do with, and the same is true of some Calvinists speaking about those who hold to the views of Arminius.

That to me is sad.

Paul fought not against the doctrines of other Christians in his time, but against the gnostics that were trying to creep in and replace Christ.

He did not go around trying to fight other Christians and believers, except when they no longer preached Christ and followed Christ as he did. When that happened, he spared no words.

Again, my deepest apologies.

 

[willowdee]

Pinotbaptist, apology accepted. I totally understand getting cranky when someone's driving you nuts.

I should clarify, and be more forthcoming. The fact that he is a Calvinist is not THE problem, though we don't agree. But a few weeks ago, I asked him specifically if he was Calvinist and he said no. But his next sermon was very Calvinist, and my husband and I invited him to visit us so we could discuss it. During that visit, he said he was a 4 point Calvinist...that he believed the atonement was sufficient for everyone, but not effecient for everyone.

He doesn't mention the name Calvin in his sermons, and I doubt that if he did, most of the congregation would know what he was talking about. But the theology of our church has always focused on man's free choice to accept or reject Jesus, and that God will never interfere with our free will. In fact, this is still being taught in our Sunday School classes and other Bible study.

One of the oddest things is that during our conversation about Calvinism, I asked him if any other members of the church had any concerns about it. He said that most members don't trust him enough to discuss it with him if they do have concerns. This, in itself, causes me some concern.

I am neither Calvinist nor Armenian, and I don't think it really matters in the long run. But I feel that he misrepresented himself to some extent, and now feel that his views of salvation are at odds with most of the membership.

I would say that 90% of his sermons focus on heresy and false gospel, and telling us, by name, who he believes is guilty of same. I feel that if he will just preach the Word, we can discern for ourselves who is teaching a false gospel. If his calling people heretics by name was an occasional thing, it probably wouldn't bother me so much, but it happens almost every Sunday.

Soooo...his being a Calvinist is not the only problem and I should have been more forthcoming, but I didn't want to write a book and put you all to sleep.

Again, I want to make clear that I love my church and I love my pastor. But this situation has caused me some sleepless nights. Since my husband doesn't want to leave and I really don't either, I expect we will decide to stay. But I'm still not sure how to deal with my differences with my pastor. He is a forceful personality, to say the least.

I also should add that I have been studying a lot, and as hard as the doctrine is to accept, I do realize that he may be right about predestination.

In Christ,
Dee

 

[mcdirector]

Pinotbaptist, apology accepted. I totally understand getting cranky when someone's driving you nuts.

I should clarify, and be more forthcoming. The fact that he is a Calvinist is not THE problem, though we don't agree. But a few weeks ago, I asked him specifically if he was Calvinist and he said no. But his next sermon was very Calvinist, and my husband and I invited him to visit us so we could discuss it. During that visit, he said he was a 4 point Calvinist...that he believed the atonement was sufficient for everyone, but not effecient for everyone.

He doesn't mention the name Calvin in his sermons, and I doubt that if he did, most of the congregation would know what he was talking about. But the theology of our church has always focused on man's free choice to accept or reject Jesus, and that God will never interfere with our free will. In fact, this is still being taught in our Sunday School classes and other Bible study.

One of the oddest things is that during our conversation about Calvinism, I asked him if any other members of the church had any concerns about it. He said that most members don't trust him enough to discuss it with him if they do have concerns. This, in itself, causes me some concern.

I am neither Calvinist nor Armenian, and I don't think it really matters in the long run. But I feel that he misrepresented himself to some extent, and now feel that his views of salvation are at odds with most of the membership.

I would say that 90% of his sermons focus on heresy and false gospel, and telling us, by name, who he believes is guilty of same. I feel that if he will just preach the Word, we can discern for ourselves who is teaching a false gospel. If his calling people heretics by name was an occasional thing, it probably wouldn't bother me so much, but it happens almost every Sunday.

Soooo...his being a Calvinist is not the only problem and I should have been more forthcoming, but I didn't want to write a book and put you all to sleep.

Again, I want to make clear that I love my church and I love my pastor. But this situation has caused me some sleepless nights. Since my husband doesn't want to leave and I really don't either, I expect we will decide to stay. But I'm still not sure how to deal with my differences with my pastor. He is a forceful personality, to say the least.

I also should add that I have been studying a lot, and as hard as the doctrine is to accept, I do realize that he may be right about predestination.

In Christ,
Dee

• Your original post was not an accurate representation of the situation.
• Your preacher is not preaching the Word, but condemning those who are not preaching the Word.
• He, in fact, lied to you when you asked him if he were Calvinistic in his beliefs but has preached at least one Calvinistic sermon.
• The congregation does not trust your pastor in his view, but he is unapproachable.
• You are beginning to accept predestination as fact.
• You most likely will not leave this church.

Have I accurately summarized your post?

 

[Bob Alkire]

The fact that he is a Calvinist is not THE problem, though we don't agree. But a few weeks ago, I asked him specifically if he was Calvinist and he said no. But his next sermon was very Calvinist,

That has been a problem in many Baptist churches in the southeast. But thank God that most pastors are very up front with their theology, both Calvinist and noncalvinist. Anbd we should be able to get along and worship together. I'm a noncalviist and have enjoyed J. Vernon McGeee and many other from their camp and if I recall correctly W. A. Criswell was calvinistic, I don't know if he still held to it at the end or not.

 

[willowdee]

Mcdirector, yes, except for the second point. I believe he is preaching the Word as he interprets it and as he feels led. He condemns those who, in his opinion, are not preaching the Word. I'm sorry, it's obvious I didn't explain it well.

 

[Gold Dragon]

I should clarify, and be more forthcoming. The fact that he is a Calvinist is not THE problem, though we don't agree. But a few weeks ago, I asked him specifically if he was Calvinist and he said no. But his next sermon was very Calvinist, and my husband and I invited him to visit us so we could discuss it. During that visit, he said he was a 4 point Calvinist...that he believed the atonement was sufficient for everyone, but not effecient for everyone.

Are you sure the word he used was efficient and not a word like effective? Efficient does not make any sense to me in that context.

I would say that 90% of his sermons focus on heresy and false gospel, and telling us, by name, who he believes is guilty of same. I feel that if he will just preach the Word, we can discern for ourselves who is teaching a false gospel. If his calling people heretics by name was an occasional thing, it probably wouldn't bother me so much, but it happens almost every Sunday.

I could not sit under a pastor who spent most of their time attacking other groups and people. I agree with you that the better way to challenge heresy is to teach biblical orthodoxy so that members will recognize heresy when it comes their way. If this view is shared with the leadership of your church, it should be mentioned to him personally and in his evaluation sessions if those exist. Pastors need constructive feedback to grow and to adjust to meet the needs of their congregation.

I find that those who spend large amounts of their time attacking others are usually insecure about their faith and need the opposition to help them define their own positions.

 

[willowdee]

Gold Dragon, thank you. Yes, I'm sure he used the word efficent. It is a quirk of his speaking pattern to do rhymes and alliterations. I think he thinks it makes things easier to remember.

I agree about attacking others. It makes me extremely uncomfortable, even when I agree, and I don't always. We have spoken briefly to him about that, but he says it is his responsibility to expose false gospel to us. He says that we might be falsely assured of our salvation if we listen to those who, in his opinion, preach "another gospel." If we're predestined to be saved or not saved, hearing a false gospel will not effect our ultimate destiny, will it? If my understanding of the Calvinist view is correct, even if we hear false gospel, God will provide understanding of the true gospel to us before we die. Or am I in error about that?

 

[Pipedude]

I'm sure he used the word efficent.

It's a common way for Calvinists to word it. It means "effective." It doesn't really say anything, because five-pointers and Arminians can also say that the atonement is sufficient for all, but not efficient for all. A more exact wording of Calvinism might be "suffcient for all, efficient for the elect." If he's a four pointer, it's kinda like saying "I believe that 3+2=5, but I do not believe that 5-3=2. In other words, it's just a way to be a Calvinist while claiming that you're not, in order to avoid reproach. (Or maybe he's just confused.)

If my understanding of the Calvinist view is correct, even if we hear false gospel, God will provide understanding of the true gospel to us before we die.

Sure, if you're elect, God will regenerate you and cause you to believe. No you worry.

But the God who ordained the ends also ordained the means to those ends. So hearing a false gospel might be a means to an end in the Lake of Fire. So you'd best avoid bad means if you don't want to go to a bad end. Of course, if you're predestined to a good end, you will wind up using good means.

If you don't know whether or not you're predestined to a good end, Calvinists recommend that you repent and believe the gospel anyway, just in case. More often than not, you wind up discovering that you're elect. At least, it will seem that way -- but there's no way to know absolutely, so St. Paul commanded us to examine ourselves whether we be in the faith.

If you finally fall away, it will prove that you were deceived all that time that you thought that you were elect. Bummer, but so it goes sometimes. If you haven't fallen away yet, better keep using those means to a good end. And that includes staying away from heresy.

You're very welcome.

 

[willowdee]

Pipedude, you're being facetious, right? I tend to take things very literally so I can't always tell when people are being serious and when they're not, especially online. Sorry about that.

 

[willowdee]

Please disregard my last post...I finally "got" yours. I'm kinda slow sometimes. :tonofbricks: