I found this list from another site and thought it was worth repeating here.
This site also has a page on "Criticising Calvinism" that is worth reading.
Let's renew a concerted effort to understand where the other side is coming from rather than continually making a bunch of false representations. As this site says, if you are writing against Calvinism make sure that the Calvinist can recognize himself in what you write.
This gentleman says:
This is from: CALVINISTIC INDEX PAGE1) Calvinism and Hyper Calvinism are poles apart. The terms are not to be used synonymously. A Hyper Calvinist is not just a zealous Calvinist. We both consider each other to be "mongrel" Calvinists. No man will call himself a Hyper Calvinist.
2) Yes Calvinists are split into several factions. But then so are many such doctrinal schools e.g. Dispensationalism, Church Government, Worship…do we sing only the Psalms or use hymns? Which hymns? Do we use music? Which music? Which set of texts do we base our Bible translation on? Is it the Textus Receptus that is important or the (KJV) AV? or both? etc.,
3) The term free will needs to be defined to avoid confusion. Calvinists will either affirm it or deny it, depending on what they think you mean…This sometimes leads to charges of contradictions. Consult the standard Calvinist Confessions e.g. the Westminster Confession of Faith Chapter 9 for a defining of terms.
4) The term free agency is not automatically the same as free will when used by a Calvinist. It is the Calvinist's preferred term to free will. Preferred so as to avoid the confusion spoken of in the above point.
5) Calvinists do believe in man's responsibility, but deny his ability to repent and believe the gospel. The two terms are not synonymous. Calvinists believe that man's inability to repent and believe are caused by his own sin ... not any positive imposition on God's part.
6) Calvinists do not believe that men are puppets or blocks of wood or robots, but responsible beings and are treated as such by God, even when fallen.
7) Calvinists are not fatalists. Calvinists believe that God has ordained the end and also the means to that end. Therefore they do believe in evangelism as the means God uses to fulfil His intention of saving the elect. It is not true to say that Calvinists believe that God saves men without the gospel. Calvinists do believe in prayer.
8) Calvinists do believe that it is the duty of men to repent and believe the gospel. This is one of our quarrels with the Hyper Calvinists.
9) Calvinists do believe that the gospel is (to quote Calvin) to be preached indiscriminately to the elect and to the reprobate (Commentary on Isaiah 54:13) This is another one of our quarrels with the Hyper Calvinists.
10) Calvinists do not limit the value or merit or worth of the blood of Christ. They do limit the intention of the blood to save any other than the elect. We are happy enough (as was John Calvin) with the statement that the blood of Christ is sufficient for the whole world but efficient only for the elect.
11) Calvinists do not believe that men are damned without any reference to their sin. God passing by and leaving certain men in their sin is not the same as God damning men by the sheer force of His decree.
12) Calvinists do not just preach on the Five Points and nothing else. At least no more so than Dispensationalists who just preach on prophecy or Pentecostals who just preach on the gifts of the Spirit etc.,
13) Calvinists do not read the Five Points into every text of scripture. Many of the major Bible commentaries, beloved and valued by all Christians e.g. Matthew Henry were written by Calvinists.
14) Calvinists do believe that men can resist the Holy Spirit. They believe that even the elect can resist the Holy Spirit, and do…but only up to the time when the Spirit regenerates their heart so that resist Him no more. The non elect effectively resist Him all their lives.
15) Calvinists do not believe that men are brought kicking and screaming irresistibly to Christ. We believe in irresistible grace. The will is not passed by in salvation. No man ever came to Christ unwillingly, or regretted that he had been brought.
16) Calvinist's do not believe that there are souls out there who want to be saved, but can't be saved because they are not of the elect.
17) Calvinists, being without access to the Lamb's Book of Life, see every man as potentially elect and preach the gospel to him.
18) Calvinists do believe in unconditional election but they do not believe in unconditional salvation. Except a man be born again, he will not enter the kingdom of Heaven (John 3:3) Except he repent, he will perish (Luke 13:3) Except he be converted etc., …all these are conditions of salvation.
19) Calvinists do believe that regeneration precedes faith in Christ. We do not confuse the term regeneration with that of justification or salvation. The Spirit of God regenerates the elect sinner enabling him to forsake the deadness of his sin and willingly embrace Christ and so be justified by faith and saved for eternity. Regeneration therefore is not synonymous with justification or salvation any more than conviction of sin is synonymous with conversion to Christ.
20) Perseverance of the saints does not mean that Calvinists believe that they must hang on for dear life without any reference to the keeping power of God. It simply means that we believe that the Christian will prove to be an overcomer in accordance with 1 John 5:4-5 etc.,
21) Some Calvinists use the phrase Particular Redemption as opposed to Limited Atonement because they can see how the General Redemptionist position may also be said to limit the atonement, although in a different way i.e. it does not set out to do all what was intended.
22) Calvinists do not believe that John Calvin is infallible…no more than Methodists believe that John Wesley is infallible or Dispensationalists allowing Schofield or John Darby the final word.
23) While Calvinists believe that saving grace and repentance are the gifts of God, given only to His elect, they do not believe that God exercises faith for them or repents for them. The elect sinner, enabled by the power of God, actually repents and believes for himself.
24) While there can be no real middle ground between the Calvinist position and that of the non Calvinist…yet most Calvinists believe that both sides really do preach the gospel. Despite our differences as to many of the details, a man who preaches that Christ died for the ungodly and that the work was sufficient to save the whosoever who will repent and believe is really preaching the gospel. We rejoice in the gospel preaching of John Wesley just as much as that of George Whitefield, although (naturally) we would hold Whitefield to be the better theologian.
25) There is a difference between a paradox and a contradiction. We know that God is sovereign, yet man is free to follow the dictates of his own will. Where the two lines meet is not for us to say. Calvinist ignorance on the matter is to be excused on the basis of Deuteronomy 29:29
26) Although Calvinists believe that even sinful acts are ordained by God (Ephesians 1:11/Proverbs 16:4) yet such makes the event certain…but not necessary. This clears God from being the author of sin. This view best explains the Cross (Acts 2:23/4:27-28/Luke 22:22) This is explained further elsewhere on this site.
This site also has a page on "Criticising Calvinism" that is worth reading.
Let's renew a concerted effort to understand where the other side is coming from rather than continually making a bunch of false representations. As this site says, if you are writing against Calvinism make sure that the Calvinist can recognize himself in what you write.
This gentleman says:
My position on the Calvinistic controversy is akin to that of Spurgeon. The good man was certainly a staunch defender of these doctrines - he said that he felt ready to die for their defence (MTP 9:274) - yet he could see those truths which emanated from the other side. He was not advocating the idea of diluting any of the five points - an unwarranted compromise - but he could write:
"The Calvinist has said, and said right bravely, that salvation is of grace alone; and the Arminian has said, and said most truthfully, that damnation is of man’s will alone, and as the result of man’s sin, and of that only. Then they have fallen out with one another. The fact is, they had each one laid hold of a truth, and if they could have put their heads together, and accepted both truths, it might have been greatly for the advantage of the Church of Christ. These two doctrines are like tram lines that you can travel on with safety and comfort, these parallel lines-ruin, of man; restoration, of God: sin, of man’s will; salvation, of God’s will: reprobation, of man’s demerit; election, of God’s free and sovereign grace: the sinner lost in hell through himself alone, the saint lifted up to heaven wholly and alone by the power and grace of God. Get those two truths thoroughly engraven upon your heart, and you will then hold comprehensively the great truths of Scripture. You will not need to crowd them into one narrow system of theology, but you will have a sort of duplicate system" (MTP 41:500)
He also said:
"But I do maintain there should be, and there must be if our churches are to be healthy and sound, a constant adherence to the fundamental doctrines of divine truth. I should be prepared to go a very long way for charity’s sake, and admit that very much of the discussion which has existed even between Arminians and Calvinists has not been a discussion about vital truth, but about the terms in which that vital truth shall be stated." (MTP 6:395)
I honestly believe that much of the trouble comes from ignorance and misunderstanding. If I thought that someone believed that God just damned men for the sheer pleasure of it, without any reference to their sins etc., then I would get pretty uptight as well. But before I wrote anything, I would seek to find out as much as I could, ever remembering the words of Oliver Cromwell in his letter to the Presbyterians of Scotland: "I beseech you in the bowels of Christ, think it possible that you may be mistaken."
