Reformed Theology vs. the Reformed Attitude

[webdog]

Originally Posted by Tom Butler
[New Calvinists] are vulnerable to becoming obnoxious and arrogant if we aren't careful.

With a little maturity, I came to realize that I was making a pest of myself, and that understanding of spiritual things is a gift from God, not because of our smarts.

I'm no less passionate, but I hope a whole lot less obnoxious and arrogant.


Ow, that one stung. Chomp, chomp. Ooh, tastes a little bland.

I forgot that I did know one Calvinist who was arrogant and obnoxious.

Me.

But I got over it and am no longer arrogant or obnoxious.

I am, therefore, quite humble.

And proud of it.

That doesn't really account for "new calvinists" (plural)

 

[sag38]

Question: Now, regarding his OP. As I've posted before, I don't know a single Calvinist who is arrogant, etc. Can anyone cite some quotes which support that allegation? So far, all I've heard are unsupported assertions that they're out there.

Example: so to do these pastors and lay-persons reason, never realizing that what they are doing, essentially, is setting up human free will on a throne above that of God Himself!

If this doesn't count as a display of arrogance from a Calvinist then I don't know what would count. It is also a malicious assumption on his part and insulting to anyone who doesn't agree with him. And, when called on it and asked to repent of such ugliness he arrogantly refused. And, he wonders why many want nothing to do with his brand of so called "named" theology.

 

[glfredrick]

It appears to me that you guys are making a mountain out of mole hill to avoid discussing the content presented. I think its clear that mandym wasn't intending to mislead, and now you all know it was a quoted OP, so move on.

I also think its interesting that some of you are offended by what two reformed believers see as a problem within your ranks, especially since some of what they are recognizing is a text book example of what we too often experience here.

A few of us actually tried to answer the OP. The problem is that if we disagree with the conclusions, we are branded as if we are avoiding the post.

I, for one, disagree that there is that level of problem within the ranks of the Reformed. In fact, most of what appears to be dissension is nothing more than semantics or a minute difference of opinion on one particular item amongst a number of agreements on other subjects. That is part and parcel of the give and take of the theological world. Anyone who reads scholarly journals of theology or philosophy will instantly recognize that for what it is. That is how the system works.

Now, in the case of the OP here in this thread, the opposite is true (or attempted). The point attempted is that the Reformed Baptists are in disarray and in-fighting proves that Calvinists cannot get along, hence the entire system is flawed. That is an absolutely flawed premise and a false conclusion buoyed on the worldview presuppositions of the OP and persons who agree with that stance.

More so, as has been raised above, the question also arises as to the level of disagreement of those who are not of the Reformed (or "Calvinist" to use that pejorative term) persuasion, with the idea being that there is a monolithic agreement amongst those not of the Reformed persuasion. That is patently false as we can see in any 10 different threads here on this board and in the scholarly (are there any non-Reformed scholarly journals?) activity.

 

[glfredrick]

Question: Now, regarding his OP. As I've posted before, I don't know a single Calvinist who is arrogant, etc. Can anyone cite some quotes which support that allegation? So far, all I've heard are unsupported assertions that they're out there.

Example: so to do these pastors and lay-persons reason, never realizing that what they are doing, essentially, is setting up human free will on a throne above that of God Himself!

If this doesn't count as a display of arrogance from a Calvinist then I don't know what would count. It is also a malicious assumption on his part and insulting to anyone who doesn't agree with him. And, when called on it and asked to repent of such ugliness he arrogantly refused. And, he wonders why many want nothing to do with his brand of so called "named" theology.

How is an observation of fact become the arrogance of a Calvinist? Simply because the observation is distasteful TO YOU does not make it an arrogant statement.

 

[Andy T.]

The OP didn't confuse me - RevMitchell used to post like this, and I've noticed mandym uses the same technique.

As to the OP, that's a shame Cals have that reputation, but sometimes I wonder if it is broad stereotyping. For instance, I hear many times from the "world" that Christians are arrogant, etc. It seems in our postmodern world that arrogance is deemed the worst of all sins.

 

[sag38]

How is an observation of fact

What fact? You have arrogantly stated your opinion and in doing so maligned bothers and sisters in Christ who might happen to disagree with you.

So much for my "ignore" button.

 

[glfredrick]

How is an observation of fact

What fact? You have arrogantly stated your opinion and in doing so maligned bothers and sisters in Christ who might happen to disagree with you.

So much for my "ignore" button.

Thought so... :1_grouphug:

Sag38, I made it very clear in my comment that I OBSERVED such to be the case. In that case, I made a statement of fact based on my own observations. You probably missed that part in your effort to call me out for my arrogance.

Now, would you like for me to dig up about 20 posts in threads on this board to further prove my observation? I can do so rather easily!

 

[Amy.G]

Some try for a "holier-than thou" and some try for a "humbler-than thou". I think sometimes you might try for both.

This Arminian, or whatever they call themselves (who knows?), wishes he had not started this smug little thread now, I am sure.
Every "non-cal" is going to lose any debate that has anything to do with the history of the Christian faith- they HAVE NO HISTORY!

You know you cannot answer the question honestly reflecting your beliefs in a way that doesn't bring glory to yourself rather than give full glory to God.

And Tom Butler and others have clearly proven you wrong on this.
It is time to just admit it and stop being obstinate.

If you are not there concerning creeds and confessions you still have some growing to do, imo.

No it's cowardly deflection.

This is a lie which is becoming a habit of yours.

This is the oldest reputable Christian theodicy in history.
I do not know why you cannot get it. BILLIONS have.
MILLIONS get it right now. Why you cannot is beyond me.

This is Calvinism. It is the only theodicy that makes an OUNCE of logical sense.

Finally an honest adherent to this nameless theology.

You ACTUALLY ADMIT that you do not believe the Bible teaches that God is sovereign.
Whether they want to admit it or not, you represent the beliefs of the others who, like you, have no nameable systematic theology.

Is that enough arrogance for you?

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Nother one a dem arrogant Calvanist fellers agen

Get da shotgun out maaaa! (couldnt Resist! )

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

BB is like livin the Hatfields & the McCoys all over except on the Internet! :smilewinkgrin:

 

[preacher4truth]

"God, I thank thee that I am not as others are, calvinists, DoGer's, predestinators, arrogantites, judgmentalites, and electioneers. I arminian seven days per week, and tithe my free-willies of all that I possesseth."*

:laugh:

- Amen

(*the above is for entertainment purposes only, and is not meant to represent anyone, nor misrepresent anyone, alive or dead, either real or fictitious, in the same vane as the OP is not meant to do the same towards anyone. Any similarities to any persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental.)

 

[Skandelon]

A few of us actually tried to answer the OP.

That is true. Good point. I was meaning only to address those avoiding the content of the OP, but I should have said so.

The problem is that if we disagree with the conclusions, we are branded as if we are avoiding the post.

Not by me. I just think it is interesting that so many of "your own" recognize this tendency among especially new and younger reformed guys. Personally, I think that tendency is pretty obvious. I know because I used to be one of them. At the time, I didn't see myself as arrogant, but looking back I definitely see it. I still have to continually pray for sanctification in this area of my life.

Now, in the case of the OP here in this thread, the opposite is true (or attempted). The point attempted is that the Reformed Baptists are in disarray and in-fighting proves that Calvinists cannot get along, hence the entire system is flawed. That is an absolutely flawed premise and a false conclusion buoyed on the worldview presuppositions of the OP and persons who agree with that stance.

I'll concede that point. I agree that infighting doesn't prove the system itself is flawed, only that those holding to that system have flaws, which is true of Christianity as a whole. I think Piper's quote I provided earlier explains why this tendency is greater among young reformers.

 

[Jerome]

I have heard Dr. Alan Cairns say many times many Calvinist lack the show of love and come across arrogant.

Alan Cairns is solid:thumbsup:

Yes, and so is the Free Presbyterian denomination.

A sample:

"They are so full of pride. They know it all. And this is Calvinism? God save us from it! God save us from it!" —Alan Cairns, "Calvinism What It Is And What It Is Not"

 

[glfredrick]

Piper was only referring to young reformers, so his quote cannot be taken in a general context as you are doing.

I've seen plenty of vitriol in the name of humility coming from those who are not of the Reformed camp, both here on this board, and in the general church world apart from this board including being refused for several ministry positions and even for several secular work positions because of my theological doctrines. THAT is antagonistic, slight disagreements as to position on nuanced theological elements is not.

In fact (and this is not intended to be a cut but rather an example) did you not formulate a web site primarily for the shooting down of Calvinistic thought? Could not some who hold Calvinistic doctrines see that as an arrogant example of holding your own professed beliefs above others and even working hard to refute their beliefs?

I see that what you have done with your blog is simply what happens in theological circles all the time -- make propositions then defend and rebut the defense when the next point is made. But some would see that as other than standard theological fare, and they have here as well.

 

[Skandelon]

The OP didn't confuse me - RevMitchell used to post like this, and I've noticed mandym uses the same technique.

Once again you prove yourself to be an objective and fair individual.

As to the OP, that's a shame Cals have that reputation, but sometimes I wonder if it is broad stereotyping. For instance, I hear many times from the "world" that Christians are arrogant, etc. It seems in our postmodern world that arrogance is deemed the worst of all sins.

I think this is a valid point. It certainly is a "stereotype" in that certainly not all Calvinists are arrogant. I worked with Piper several years ago at an event and he was incredibly humble and gracious, as was Al Mohler and Tom Nettles when I meet them. I think the "tendency" that even these men have attested too is in regard to NEW and especially younger Calvinists. I think it was Sproul who talked about the need to lock a new Calvinist up for a couple years after his conversion so he doesn't do more damage than good (maybe MacArthur?). I'll have to look for that quote.

But, since the resurgence of Reformed theology is largely made up of younger men within the "post-modern" era; through influence of men like Piper, Driscoll, Chandler and the like, the two movements are difficult to separate with regard to the attitude and perception of those who make it up.

Just my perspective.

 

[Skandelon]

Piper was only referring to young reformers, so his quote cannot be taken in a general context as you are doing.

I've continually pointed to that distinction, so I think we are in agreement there.

I've seen plenty of vitriol in the name of humility coming from those who are not of the Reformed camp

Yep. There is enough arrogance and immaturity to go around, but that wasn't the subject of the OP...

In fact (and this is not intended to be a cut but rather an example) did you not formulate a web site primarily for the shooting down of Calvinistic thought?

I started a blog which kindly and respectfully critiqued Calvinistic doctrine so as to help others not make what I believe are interpretive mistakes, as I once did. There is nothing vitriolic about that.

Could not some who hold Calvinistic doctrines see that as an arrogant example of holding your own professed beliefs above others and even working hard to refute their beliefs?

I don't believe people have a problem with respectful and kind disagreements. The problem is prideful and arrogant attitudes which demean the person, rather than maturely addressing the issues at hand.

 

[glfredrick]

I think this is a valid point. It certainly is a "stereotype" in that certainly not all Calvinists are arrogant. I worked with Piper several years ago at an event and he was incredibly humble and gracious, as was Al Mohler and Tom Nettles when I meet them. I think the "tendency" that even these men have attested too is in regard to NEW and especially younger Calvinists. I think it was Sproul who talked about the need to lock a new Calvinist up for a couple years after his conversion so he doesn't do more damage than good (maybe MacArthur?). I'll have to look for that quote.

But, since the resurgence of Reformed theology is largely made up of younger men within the "post-modern" era; through influence of men like Piper, Driscoll, Chandler and the like, the two movements are difficult to separate with regard to the attitude and perception of those who make it up.

Just my perspective.

If there is an arrogance of young Reformed, it would seem that it is from a discovery about some of the great "big picture" truths of the Scripture that they have learned, often in opposition of their earlier church training. They are eager to go out and transform the church world and often think that the force of their arguments -- often honed in a pure theological realm via papers and scholarly discussion -- will carry the day in a congregation where people are all over the map with doctrines, beliefs, and level of scholarship.

I have watched this happen on several occasions when young seminary students inherit their first pulpit. This further hardens the congregation against the very scriptural position that they ought to at least respectfully consider, and as the hardening against "Calvinism" continues, it feeds into a worldview where Reformed doctrine is seen as an enemy and a problem instead of a very biblical system that has been held by the majority position in the church since its inception.

Sad how the enemy can use either side to accomplish his own nefarious task of further separating us from God and from each other. :BangHead:

But again, this does not mean that the Reformed Doctrines are the problem. Rather, the sin of the individual who is trying to run ahead of God and fix things on his or her own.

 

[J.D.]

Once again you prove yourself to be an objective and fair individual.


I think this is a valid point. It certainly is a "stereotype" in that certainly not all Calvinists are arrogant. I worked with Piper several years ago at an event and he was incredibly humble and gracious, as was Al Mohler and Tom Nettles when I meet them. I think the "tendency" that even these men have attested too is in regard to NEW and especially younger Calvinists. I think it was Sproul who talked about the need to lock a new Calvinist up for a couple years after his conversion so he doesn't do more damage than good (maybe MacArthur?). I'll have to look for that quote.

But, since the resurgence of Reformed theology is largely made up of younger men within the "post-modern" era; through influence of men like Piper, Driscoll, Chandler and the like, the two movements are difficult to separate with regard to the attitude and perception of those who make it up.

Just my perspective.

Here's my perspective: I do not accept that "Calvinists are arrogant" as the default. This is nothing but another attempt to get Calvinists to surrender the moral high ground to our attackers. Singling out excited rants as your proof does not make the case. I've seen arrogance, and believe me, Calvinists are not arrogant.

Who is more arrogant: the man that takes no credit for a saved soul, because he knows that only God can win souls to Christ, or the man that claims he is personally responsible for his church "winning" over a million souls to Christ?

 

[Jerome]

"It is one thing to believe in the Doctrines of Grace, but quite another thing to accept all the encrustations which have formed upon those doctrines and also a very different matter to agree with the spirit which is apparent in some who profess to propagate the pure Truth of God." —Charles Spurgeon, "Rivers of Water in a Dry Place"

 

[Skandelon]

Here's my perspective: I do not accept that "Calvinists are arrogant" as the default.

I agree, but as stated I do believe there is a tendency for new young coverts to give this perception, for the reasons stated by Piper.

Who is more arrogant: the man that takes no credit for a saved soul, because he knows that only God can win souls to Christ, or the man that claims he is personally responsible for his church "winning" over a million souls to Christ?

The latter is not any more representative of one system over the other. It is representative of someone who doesn't credit God with salvation, which is not the view of any true Baptist, Calvinistic or not.