Showing posts with label Doctrine-Calvinism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Doctrine-Calvinism. Show all posts

Thursday, November 12, 2009

Ten Effects of Believing in the Five Points of Calvinism – John Piper

piper

John Piper outlines the Ten Effects of Believing in the Five Points of Calvinism

1. These truths make me stand in awe of God and lead me into the depth of true God-centered worship.

Ephesians 1:6, 12, 14

Romans 11:36

2. These truths help protect me from trifling with divine things.

3. These truths make me marvel at my own salvation.

Ephesians 1

4. These truths make me alert to man-centered substitutes that pose as good news.

1 Timothy 3:15

5. These truths make me groan over the indescribable disease of our secular, God-belittling culture.

6. These truths make me confident that the work which God planned and began, he will finish – both globally and personally.

Romans 8:28-39

7. These truths make me see everything in the light of God’s sovereign purposes – that from him and through him and to him are all things, to him be glory forever and ever.

1 Corinthians 10:31

Ephesians 1:11

8. These truths make me hopeful that God has the will, the right, and the power to answer prayer that people be changed.

Ezekiel 11:19

Deuteronomy 30:6

Ezekiel 36:27

2 Timothy 2:25-26

Acts 16:14

9. These truths reminds me that evangelism is absolutely essential for people to come to Christ and be saved, and that there is great hope for success in leading people to faith, but that conversion is not finally dependent on me or limited by the hardness of the unbeliever.

John 10:16

10. These truths make me sure that God will triumph in the end.

Isaiah 46:9-10

Wednesday, January 28, 2009

Clarifying Calvinism (Conclusion)

TULIP Phil Johnson @ http://www.sfpulpit.com finished a series on calvinism)

Part VIII: To sum up. . .

* The perverseness of our fallen state—that’s the doctrine of Total Depravity.

* The priority of God’s electing choice—that is the doctrine of Unconditional Election

* The particularity of His saving work—that, as we saw, entails the doctrine that is often called Limited Atonement.

* The power of His loving deliverance—that, once more, is the doctrine of Irresistible Grace.

* The perfection of His redemptive plan—that is nothing other than the doctrine of Perseverance.

From His conclusion:

You might be one of those people who doesn’t want to be referred to as a Calvinist or an Arminian. But the fact is, if you are a Christian at all, you do already affirm the fundamental principle in every one of those truths. You already know in your heart of hearts that you weren’t born again because you were morally superior to your unbelieving neighbors. You were worthy of God’s wrath just like them (Eph. 2:1 3). According to Ephesians 2:4-6, it was God who quickened you and showed you a special mercy—and that is why you are a believer. You already know that in your heart. You don’t really believe you summoned faith and came to Christ in your own power and by your own unaided free will. You don’t actually believe you are morally superior to people who don’t believe. You therefore must see, somewhere in your soul, that God has given you special grace that He has not necessarily shown everyone.

You also believe God is absolutely sovereign over all things. I know you do, because you lean on the promise of Romans 8:28. And that promise would mean nothing if God were not in control of every detail of everything that happens. If He is not in control of all things, how could He work all things together for good?

QuoteFurthermore, you pray for the lost, which means in your heart, you believe God is sovereign over their salvation. If you didn’t really believe He was sovereign in saving sinners, you’d quit praying for the lost and start doing everything you could to buttonhole people into the kingdom by hook or by crook, instead. But you know that would be folly. And you pray about other things, too, don’t you? You pray that God will change this person’s heart, or alter the circumstances of that problem. That’s pure Calvinism. When we go to God in prayer, we’re expressing faith in His sovereignty over the circumstances of our lives.

You even believe God operates sovereignly in the administration of all His providence. You say things like, “If the Lord will, we shall live, and do this, or that” (James 4:15)—because in your heart you believe that God works all things after the counsel of His own will (Eph. 1:11), and nothing happens apart from His will.

Nothing is more biblical than these doctrines that are commonly labeled Calvinism. In a way, it is a shame they have been given an extrabiblical name, because these truths are the very essence of what Scripture teaches. The very gist of Calvinism is nowhere more clearly stated than in the simple words of our verse: “We love Him, because He first loved us.”

Wednesday, May 21, 2008

A Few Problems With Arminianism and a Case For Calvinism



This is part of a DVD called "The Great Debate: Predestination vs. Free Will" distributed by the Apologetics Group. You can purchase this DVD here:
http://tinyurl.com/5cdhbe

This is Dr. Bruce Ware arguing for the position of Calvinism in this video.

Monday, May 05, 2008

Reformed Theology

The Bethlehem Institute has released a series on the doctrines of Grace. Their description:
"Confused about or unfamiliar with the "doctrines of grace"? Do you want to learn more about their biblical foundations and implications for the Christian life?

We've just updated Pastor John's TULIP seminar with new audio and video.

In this seminar he goes through all five points—Total depravity, Unconditional election, Limited atonement, Irresistible grace, and Perseverance of the saints. He identifies them from the Scriptures, considering the arguments against them, and explaining why this package called "Calvinism"—though controversial—is wonderfully good news."

TULIP, Part 1: Introduction


See the rest of this seminar:


Seminar Notes

  1. Assumptions
  2. Total Depravity
  3. Irresistible Grace
  4. Limited Atonement
  5. Unconditional Election
  6. Perseverance of the Saints

Tuesday, January 15, 2008

Calvinists Who Don't Know They Are, 2

From Thabiti Anyabwile @http://purechurch.blogspot.com

Yesterday we posted part 1 of a quote from J.I. Packer's Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God, in which Packer helps us see that in giving God thanks for their salvation many folks think of conversion like Calvinists even if that is not their conscious creed, so to speak. Today's quote provides the second reason Packer thinks many folks may be "Calvinists" and not know it.

"There is a second way in which you acknowledge that God is sovereign in salvation. You pray for the conversion of others. In what terms, now, do you intercede for them? Do you limit yourself to asking that God will bring them to a point where they can save themselves, independently of Him? I do not think you do. I think that what you do is to pray in categorical terms that God will, quite simply and decisively, save them: that He will open the eyes of their understanding, soften their hard hearts, renew their natures, and move their wills to receive the Saviour. You ask God to work in them everything necessary for their salvation. You would not dream of making it a point in your prayer that you are not asking God actually to bring them to faith, because you recognize that that is something He cannot do. Nothing of the sort! When you pray for unconverted people, you do so on the assumption that it is in God's power to bring them to faith. You entreat Him to do that very thing, and your confidence in asking rests upon the certainty that He is able to do what you ask. And so indeed He is: this conviction, which animates your intercessions, is God's own truth, written on your heart by the Holy Spirit. In prayer, then (and the Christian is at his sanest and wisest when he prays), you know that it is God who saves men; you know that what makes men turn to God is God's own gracious work of drawing them to Himself; and the content of your prayers is determined by this knowledge. Thus, by your practice or intercession, no less than by giving thanks for your conversion, you acknowledge and confess the sovereignty of God's grace. And so do all Christian people everywhere.

"There is a long-standing controversy in the Church as to whether God is really Lord in relation to human conduct and saving faith or not. What has been said shows us how we should regard this controversy. The situation is not what it seems to be. For it is not true that some Christians believe in divine sovereignty while others hold an opposite view. What is true is that all Christians believe in divine sovereignty, but some are not aware that they do, and mistakenly imagine and insist that they reject it. What causes this odd state of affairs? the root cause is the same as in most cases of error in the Church--the intruding of rationalistic speculations, the passion for systematic consistency, a reluctance to recognize the existence of mystery and to let God be wiser than men, and a consequent subjecting of Scripture to the supposed demands of human logic. People see that the Bible teaches man's responsibility for his actions; they do not see (man, indeed, cannot see) how this is consistent with the sovereign Lordship of God over those actions. They are not content to let the two truths live side by side, as they do in the Scriptures, but jump to the conclusion that, in order to uphold the biblical truth of human responsibility, they are bound to reject the equally biblical and equally true doctrine of divine sovereignty, and to explain away the great number of texts that teach it. The desire to over-simplify the Bible by cutting out the mysteries is natural to our perverse minds, and it is not surprising that even good men should fall victim to it. Hence this persistent and troublesome dispute. The irony of the situation, however, is that when we ask how the two sides pray, it becomes apparent that those who profess to deny God's sovereignty really believe in it just as strongly as those who affirm it.

"How, then, do you pray? Do you ask God for your daily bread? Do you thank God for your conversion? Do you pray for the conversion of others? If the answer is 'no,' I can only say that I do not think that you are yet born again. But if the answer is 'yes'--well, that proves that, whatever side you may have taken in debates on this question in the past, in your heart you believe in the sovereignty of God no less firmly than anyone else. On our feet we may have arguments about it, but on our knees we are all agreed. And it is this common agreement, of which our prayers give proof, that I take as our starting point now."

Monday, January 14, 2008

Calvinists Who Don't Know They Are, 1

by FellowElder @www.://purechurch.blogspot.com

Labels are used for convenience, but sometimes prove themselves to be quite inconvenient. As an amateur historian, I appreciate labels when they're used with some precision. They help us to make contact with the people and ideas and history that came before us. So, they can be useful. But they can also, when used sloppily or dishonestly, do more to occlude than elucidate. "Calvinist" and "Arminian" are two such labels. They're helpful when understood and used appropriately, but terribly harmful when called upon without understanding or precision.

But J.I. Packer helps us in understanding the label "Calvinist," and in so doing makes it clear that there are more "Calvinists" in the world than we'd suspect. In fact, many may be "Calvinists" and not know it. From Packer's Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God:

"Nor, again, am I going to spend time proving to you the particular truth that God is sovereign in salvation. For that, too, you believe already. Two facts show this. In the first place, you give God thanks for your conversion. Now why do you do that? Because you know in your heart that God was entirely responsible for it. You did not save yourself; He saved you. Your thanksgiving is itself an acknowledgement that your conversion was not your own work, but His work. You do not put it down to chance or accident that you attended a Christian church, that you heard the Christian gospel, that you had Christian friends and, perhaps, a Christian home, that the Bible fell into your hands, that you saw your need of Christ and came to trust Him as your Saviour. You do not attribute your repenting and believing to your own wisdom, or prudence, or sound judgment, or good sense. Perhaps, in the days when you were seeking Christ, you laboured and strove hard, read and pondered much, but all that outlay of effort did not make your conversion your own work. Your act of faith when you closed with Christ was yours in the sense that it was you who performed it; but that does not mean that you saved yourself. In fact, it never occurs to you to suppose that you saved yourself.

"As you look back, you take to yourself the blame for your past blindness and indifference and obstinacy and evasiveness in face of the gospel message; but you do not pat yourself on the back for having been at length mastered by the insistent Christ. You would never dream of dividing the credit for your salvation between God and yourself. You have never for one moment supposed that the decisive contribution to your salvation was yours and not God's. You have never told God that, while you are grateful for the means and opportunities of grace that He gave you, you realize that you have to thank, not Him, but yourself for the fact that you responded to His call. Your heart revolts at the very thought of talking to God in such terms. In fact, you thank Him no less sincerely for the gift of faith and repentance than for the gift of a Christ to trust and turn to. This is the way in which, since you became a Christian, your heart has always led you. You give God all the glory for all that your salvation involved, and you know that it would be blasphemy if you refused to thank Him for bringing you to faith. Thus, in the way that you think of your conversion and give thanks for your conversion, you acknowledge the sovereignty of divine grace. And every other Christian in the world does the same.

"It is instructive in this connection to ponder Charles Simeon's account of his conversion with John Wesley on Dec. 20th, 1784: '"Sir, I understand that you are called an Arminian; and I have been sometimes called a Calvinist; and therefore I suppose we are to draw daggers. But before I consent to begin the combat, with your permission I will ask you a few questions.... Pray, Sir, do you feel yourself a depraved creature, so depraved that you would never have thought of turning to God, if God had not first put it into your heart?" "Yes," says the veteran, "I do indeed." "And do you utterly despair of recommending yourself to God by anything you can do; and look for salvation solely through the blood and righteousness of Christ?" "Yes, solely through Christ" "But, Sir, supposing you were at first saved by Christ, are you now somehow or other to save yourself afterwards by your own works?" "Now, I must be saved by Christ from first to last." "Allowing, then, that you were first turned by the grace of God, are you not in some way or other to keep yourself by your own power?" "No." "What, then, are you to be upheld every hour and every moment by God, as much as an infant in its mother's arms?" "Yes, altogether." "and is all your hope in the grace and mercy of God to preserve you unto His heavenly kingdom?" "Yes, I have no hope but in Him." "Then, Sir, with your leave I will put up my dagger again; fir this is all my Calvinism; this is my election, my justification by faith, my final perseverance: it is in substance all that I hold, and as I hold it; and therefore, if you please, instead of searching out terms and phrases to be a ground of contention between us, we will cordially unite in those things wherein we agree."'"

Tuesday, May 08, 2007

Calvinist Acrostics

Ever since Loraine Boettner's The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination Calvinism has been outlined by the acrostic TULIP:

  • Total Depravity
  • Unconditional Election
  • Limited Atonement
  • Irresistible Grace
  • Perseverance of the Saints

Roger Nicole suggests the following replacements although the first is not an acrostic:
  • Radical and Pervasive Depravity
  • Sovereign, Divine Election
  • Definite Atonement (or Particular Redemption)
  • Effectual, Saving Grace
  • Perseverance of God with the Saints
and
  • GRACE is:
  • Obligatory (that is, indispensable)
  • Sovereign (in choice)
  • Particular (in redemption)
  • Effectual (in operation)
  • Lasting (that is, secure)

Phil Johnson's outline of Calvinism given at Shepherd's Conference 2007 was based on John 4:19 - "We love Him because He first loved us." The outline is as follows:
  • Perverseness of our fallen state - (we could not love Him first)
  • Priority of God's electing choice - (He loved us first)
  • Particularity of God's saving work - (He loved us)
  • Power of His loving deliverance - (We love Him because)
  • Perfection of His redemptive plan - (We love)

Monday, January 01, 2007

Why Calvinism?

By Tony Reinke @ http://spurgeon.wordpress.com/

Why John Calvin?

We’re pushing off into a 5-month voyage of the life and thought of John Calvin. Where this boat will float us I cannot say. Augustine said that he wrote to learn and that’s my intention. But I can predict with certainty that these will not be easy seas. Understanding God’s motives and actions require the utmost humility. Calvin leads us off the path of human wisdom to the cliff edge of divine mystery. Scripture leads us here, so we go.

My goal is to uncover the implications of Calvinism for the Christian life (If you want a 20-point defense of limited atonement, you will not find it here). But this will not be a difficult task. Calvin never strays very far into theology without showing the practical implications.

Here are a few answers that come to mind when we ask: Why Calvin? Why now?

1. Because Calvinism is biblical. No system of theology has better (notice I did not say ‘perfectly’) displayed a consistently biblical framework. If you want to be consistent with all of Scripture, Calvinism is your system. Thus, Calvinism a firm confrontation to theological reductionism, of those who build theological systems from only parts of Scripture. We must deal with God’s sovereignty expressed all over the Old and New Testaments.

2. Because Calvinism is tested. The greatest theological minds in church history were Calvinists. Augustine, who predates Calvin by centuries, laid a foundation Calvin could easily build on. After Calvin, men like Jonathan Edwards and John Owen stand atop the list of theological elites who were theological Calvinists. The Puritans in general join others like B.B. Warfield, J. Gresham Machen, Cornelius Van Til and the other early Princeton Seminary leaders on the list. Francis Schaeffer was a Calvinist. The great preacher Charles Spurgeon equated Calvinism with the gospel itself. And this is just a sampling. For centuries Calvinism has caught the eye of the brightest theological minds, preachers, philosophers, hymn writers, etc.

3. Because Calvinism is a relevant worldview. We are not talking merely about theology and doctrine! Calvinism puts every detail of this world – not in the hands of mere men or fate or luck – but in a personal God who is working all of world history towards one final goal. To say it another way, “there is nothing casual nor contingent in the world.” So what does a Calvinist look like? B.B. Warfield wrote, “He [the Calvinist] has caught sight of the ineffable Vision, and he will not let it fade for a moment from his eyes – God in nature, God in history, God in grace. Everywhere he sees God in His mighty stepping, everywhere he feels the working of his mighty arm, the throbbing of His mighty heart.” Calvinism is a worldview that embraces music, art, history, world wars, political leaders, your health, skin color, spouse and the house you live in. Every detail flows from the perfect plan of a sovereign God.

4. Because Calvinism brings reverence and trust in God. According to Calvin, without reverence towards God and worshipping Him as the giver of all things, we cannot know God. Understanding God is not about scholarship and academic degrees but of piety, submission and love towards God. A true study of Calvin and Calvinism will help us foster these godly characteristics.

5. Because Calvinism protects the church. Whether we are talking about open theism, theological liberalism, religious relativism, emergent church movement, church-growth methods, new perspectives of Paul or misunderstandings of the fundamental differences between the gospels of Evangelicalism and Roman Catholicism, Calvinism will keep our attention on Scripture. In the book The Doctrines of Grace, Boice and Ryken write, “The pathway from Calvinism to liberalism – and even atheism – is well worn, and it usually passes through Arminianism” (p. 66). Churches who preach a god unable to sovereignly manage the world to His own glory become vulnerable to the most grave errors.

6. Because Calvinism brings comfort. When life is tough, there is no comfort in a powerless god. Only when we understand God to be firmly in control of our pain and discomforts can we say with Job, “The Lord gives and the Lord takes away. Blessed be the name of the Lord!” And only then can we say with Paul, “All things work together for the good of those who love God.” Only a sovereign God can comfort us in our deepest trials.

7. Because Calvinism is high. If you want to grasp God, you must stand on the highest plateau to get a glimpse of his majesty. Steven Lawson’s newest book reminds us that Calvinism is where “The lofty truths of divine sovereignty provide the greatest and grandest view of God” and “The doctrines of grace serve to elevate the entire life of the church.” Calvinism forces us to climb higher than we imagined, to see bigger things then we thought possible, and elevates the worship and reverence of the church beyond the routine and mundane.

8. Because Calvinism is cool. That’s right. Last Fall Christianity Today called Calvinists, “Young, Restless and Reformed,” which is another way of saying Calvinists are now the cool kids in school. A study of Calvinism is timely. Seriously, people can see through the wafer thin glazing of seeker sensitive church growth movement. Confusing conversations and open theism simply will not do. Christians want a mighty God who sits high and exalted, who shakes the heavens and whose right hand controls every detail of life to His own glory. More and more, I hear of people leaving churches that preach a wimpy god.

Conclusion

Loraine Boettner wrote of John Calvin that he “ventured boldly but reverently upon the brink of that abyss of speculation where all human knowledge is lost in mystery and adoration.” And in pursuing the depths of Scripture, Calvin has set before us the Christian life as is flows from the most profound theology.

Thursday, November 02, 2006

The T in TULIP - Part 2

Permalink

From http://www.challies.com/

This is the second article in a series dealing with the Five Points of Calvinism and attempting to draw some fresh application from them. I anticipate that each of the five points will merit two articles.

The first article dealing with the T in TULIP can be found here. Today we will seek personal application for this doctrine.

Total Depravity: The Great Equalizer

I often feel that I have a boring or even uninspiring testimony. Like most believers, I have sat through (and sometimes endured) courses, seminars and Bible studies that have taught the value of a good testimony in evangelizing the lost. Many of these have taught evangelistic techniques that begin and end with a riveting testimony, as if God can only save through such a testimony. Of course, like any long-time believer, I have heard some incredible and inspiring testimonies. I have heard about women who were prostitutes giving their lives to the Lord and becoming active in ministry to women. I have met men who were drug dealers, living lives that would cause the most hardened of us to pale, but who were convicted of their sin and, through God's grace, were saved. Compared to these, my testimony seems bland. It seems boring.

My testimony goes something like this: I was born into a Christian home. I was a pretty good kid and never got into any real trouble. Sure I lied a little bit and stole some pocket change from my mother on occasion, but I never did anything really bad. At some point during my teenage years I became a Christian. I do not have a crystal-clear idea of when this happened, but I do know that by the time I graduated high school I was a committed Christian. The end. Not surprisingly, no one has ever offered me a book deal or a spot on the speaking circuit to share that testimony with others.

Rebecca of "Rebecca Writes" fame, once expressed a similar sentiment in an article on her blog. "I came to Christ when I was very young. For almost as long as I can remember, I have been a crooked arrow being made straight rather than a crooked arrow spinning wildly. My testimony doesn't start with 'I was a teenaged prostitute drug-dealing felon, but God saved me.' Nope. 'I was a naughty five-year-old' is about the worst I can do."

In the article Rebecca expresses a belief that I share - Total Depravity is the great equalizer of believers before God. Even when we compare the most sinful man to the young boy who was saved long before he even knew how to get into serious trouble, we see that all men are equal before this law. After all, the Scriptures teach that we are not sinners merely because of the degree of our depravity, but because of the extent. As we saw in the first article on this topic, if we were to speak of a person who was totally depraved in degree, we would mean that the person was exactly as sinful as he could possibly be. Every thought of his heart and every action he undertook would be wholly, completely evil. Clearly there are some people in the world who are more depraved in degree than others and thus the degree of human depravity varies from person to person. This is why we need to distinguish between degree and extent. When we speak of a person who is totally depraved in extent, we mean that every part of that person has been affected by sin. His mind, body, spirit, motives, and thoughts are all corrupt and imperfect. In this measure, all men are equal.

The extent of my depravity is just as great as that of the worst sinner the world has ever known. The thoughts of his heart were continually evil, and so were mine. He hated God, and so did I. I had little opportunity to express this hatred and resentment, yet the Bible teaches that it was there all along. Titus 3:3 tells us that "For we ourselves were once foolish, disobedient, led astray, slaves to various passions and pleasures, passing our days in malice and envy, hated by others and hating one another." These words are as true of a child as they are of an adult. Even a young child passes her days in foolishness, disobedience and malice towards both God and men. There are none who are truly innocent before God.

Ephesians 2:1-3 reads, "And you were dead in the trespasses and sins in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience--among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind." Rebecca writes, "Yep, there I was, in the evil band of those marching along the wrong path. I looked innocent enough, with my ringlets and ruffly dress and patent leather shoes, but what you couldn't see is that I, too, was being energized by a spirit ruled by the prince of the power of the air. Yet God, in his mercy, reached down and plucked me from the power of darkness and transferred me to the kingdom of the Son."

Were it not for Scripture's clear teaching on Total Depravity, I may have cause to boast or to consider myself somehow more innocent than a person who instigated and endured much pain and suffering before being drawn to the Lord. Yet the Bible teaches me that my depravity, even as a child, was as great in extent as anyone's. It was only His grace that kept me from being as corrupt in degree. If God delights in saving us, who are depraved in extent, we know also that God can save anyone despite the degree of his sin. If I compare myself to another and find him more in need of a Savior than I, I have made the mistake of comparing my sin to his, instead of comparing my sin to God's perfection. God does not judge us by comparing one to the other, but against His perfect Law.

Before I close, I want to return briefly to those of us with what we perceive to be boring testimonies. It is amazing - shocking really - that the miracle of being delivered from death to life can be considered bland by myself or anyone else. Yet we all love a good story, and my story does not seem particularly exciting. But in reality, I think the testimony of a person, raised in a Christian home, who was saved in childhood is the most exciting testimony we can be privileged to hear. Is it not immeasurably beautiful that God is, indeed, faithful from one generation to the next? He promised the Israelites that He would show "steadfast love to thousands [of generations] of those who love me and keep my commandments." (Exodus 20:6). Perhaps this is best-expressed (as the footnote in the ESV says) as "showing steadfast love to the thousandth generation" of those who love Him. When the child of believing parents is given the gift of eternal life, we can marvel in God's faithfulness to His promises. We can marvel also in His grace, that there are some whom He so blesses so that they do not need to experience such a degree of sin. Truly God is merciful. I pray and plead that He will extend such grace to my children, that they, too, may have testimonies of being drawn to Him while they are still young.

Total Depravity is not mere doctrine, but is truth that should and must impact the believer's life. This truth is the great equalizer, for it shows that the best and worst of men are all equally corrupt in light of God's perfect standard. "The man who looks intently into the perfect law that gives freedom, and continues to do this, not forgetting what he has heard, but doing it–he will be blessed in what he does." (James 1:23) Rebecca writes, "Total depravity is both the nastiest and loveliest of truths, because it's only by seeing exactly what I was that I can understand what has been done for me. Knowing the depth of God's love comes only as I fathom how far he had to stoop to grasp me." God had to stoop just as far to grab me as He did the lowliest criminal, for we were equally dead, equally depraved and equally in need of His grace, His life. We are equal as we fall to our faces before the cross.

We will continue this discussion in the future, as we move to the "U" in TULIP.

Wednesday, November 01, 2006

Why Promote Reformation Theology?

by Don Matzat@http://www.issuesetc.org

Since the time of the Reformation, Christians have been divided into two primary, groups: Catholics and Protestants. Considering the present state of affairs within the Christian Church, I believe it is time that we begin to identify three primary groups:

  • Roman Catholics;
  • Reformation Protestants; and
  • Evangelical Protestants.

While the three groups do have a great deal in common such as the Doctrine of the Trinity a proper understanding of the person of Jesus Christ, and belief in the basic historic events which provide the substance for the Christian faith, there is also great diversity. You may find this hard to believe, but when you compare the three groups, Reformation Protestants today are as distinct from Evangelical Protestants as they arc from Roman Catholics.

The Protestant Reformation corrected the errors of Rome. For the Reformers, the Gospel of Jesus Christ. including the forgiveness of sins and the imputation of the righteousness of Christ to the sinner was the focus of attention. But the Protestant movement was not static. As the years past, further developments gradually eroded some of the basic truths emphasized in the Reformation.

For example:

    • the Methodist revival in England introduced decision theology;
    • the First Great Awakening produced a new type of revival gathering;
    • the Second Great Awakening introduced the "new measures" of Charles Finney. Justification was rejected and conversion was a human decision produced by persuasive techniques;
    • Fundamentalism changed the focus from the Gospel to the Bible;
    • premillennial dispensationalism introduced a distorted view of the end of the world;
    • Pentecostalism arose in 1900, providing the roots for the modern Charismatic Movement;
    • the establishment of the Moral Majority and the Christian Coalition focused the attention of Evangelicals upon social and political issues.

Protestant Evangelicalism, as we know it, took shape in the 40's and 50's Yet, the movements of the past have left an indelible mark. Many of the Reformation distinctives have been lost or distorted. Consider the following table, comparing Roman Catholics, Protestant Evangelicals and Reformation Protestants:

Table 1

Why Promote Reformation Theology?

ROMAN CATHOLICS

REFORMATION PROTESTANTS

EVANGELICAL PROTESTANTS

History

While claiming a continuous line of history back to the first
century, many of the clear teachings of the Apostles have been lost or discarded.

Initiated in sixteenth century Germany as a result of Luther's rediscovery of justification by grace alone through faith alone.

Churches of the Reformation are primarily Lutheran and Calvinist (Reformed).

Modern Evangelicalism arose in the 40's and 50's as an effort to return to the basic things of the gospel, to confront liberalism, and to counter the negativism of Fundamentalists. Four developments that have shaped Modern Evangelicalism: National Association of Evangelicals formed in 1942; the rise of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association; Fuller Theological Seminary organized in 1947; and the production of the journal Christianity Today to counter the more liberal Christian Century. Popularized modern "born again" Christianity promoted via Christian bookstores, radio, and television. Fuller Seminary led the way in promoting modern psychology, introducing both the Church Growth and "signs and wonders" movements.

Basis of
Authority

The Church establishes the authority of Scripture
and traditions.

Scripture Alone!

The issue is not Scripture Alone but rather retaining either a "high view" (conservative Evangelicals) or "low view" (liberal Evangelicals) of Scripture. Heavy emphasis upon the role of experience undermines biblical authority.

Doctrinal
Standards

As demonstrated in the new
catechism, the official position of Rome on key doctrines remains unchanged.
There is a wide diversity of beliefs
permitted.
Creedal statements and confessional documents clearly state what is believed. Reformation churches are "confessional" churches. Agreement on basic essentials: bible is the Word of God, creation, virgin birth, substitutionary atonement, and second coming. Disdain for creeds and confessions opens the door for wide diversity. Evangelicals generally have an unclear definition of the Gospel and make no distinction between Law and Gospel. Major Reformation distinctives have been lost or forgotten.

Doctrine
of Sin

(What is man's part in salvation?)

Human nature has been wounded by original sin.

Man, empowered by the
Holy Spirit, cooperates in his
salvation by doing good works.
(synergism)

Man is dead in his trespasses and sin.

Both Lutherans and Calvinists believe that God, who acts upon the human heart through the hearing of the Gospel, is solely responsible for salvation.

Grace alone!
(monergism)

Many Evangelicals are Arminian. Influenced by the eighteenth century Methodist revival, the nineteenth century "new measures" of Charles Finney, and the twentieth century work of Billy Graham, conversion is seen as an act of the human will. Arminians, reacting against Calvinism, taught that God's grace extends to all, and man must be persuaded to make a decision to accept that grace.
(synergism)

Lutherans, contrary to Calvinists, accept universal grace, but believe that man is capable of rejecting grace. Contrary to Arminians, Lutherans believe that man is incapable of accepting grace.

Justification

(How does man become righteous before God?)

Man becomes righteous as a result of the infused grace of the Sacraments.
Righteousness is actual.

Perfection is required for eternal
life. While Purgatory has lost favor, it remains a necessary part of the system.

Justification is the defining truth of the Reformation.

The perfect righteousness of Jesus Christ is, by the grace of God, imputed to the sinner. The righteousness that saves is an alien righteousness received by faith.

For Lutherans, justification is the "cardinal doctrine" by which the church either rises or falls.

The nineteenth century witnessed the rise of Evangelical Revivalism. In the Second Great Awakening, Charles Finney rejected the imputed righteousness of Jesus Christ to the sinner because the doctrine, in his mind, hindered moral reform. While Modern Evangelicals might not be as heretical as Finney, the doctrine of justification has all but been forgotten!

The primary issues for Evangelicals are: "getting saved", "being born-again", and living moral lives.

Trends

Renewed ecumenical fervor.

Protestants are separated brethren and should be encouraged to
return to the fold.

Possibility of eternal life extended to the sincere followers of other world religions.

There is a dangerous flirting with Modern Evangelicalism via the Church Growth Movement and the Promise Keepers.

Some have chosen to adopt Evangelical style while seeking to retain Reformation substance.

There are a number of interesting trends in Modern Evangelicalism. The document Catholics and Evangelicals Together indicated how far many Evangelical leaders had strayed from the Reformation.

A number of leading Evangelicals have returned to the historic confessions of either Eastern Orthodoxy or the Reformation. An Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals has formed. Their goal is to call Evangelicals back to the truths of the Reformation.

Why promote Reformation theology, today?

It is a necessary emphasis for three reasons: First, to hold the line against the errors of Catholicism. Rome's removal of its condemnation of Protestants does not mean that those Protestants who are committed to the sixteenth century Reformation must reciprocate. Second, to encourage Lutherans and Calvinists to remain true to their heritage and not to get caught up in the glitz of modern evangelicalism. And third, to call Protestant Evangelicals who have strayed from their roots back to a commitment to the biblical truths of the Reformation.

The necessity for a renewed focus upon the distinctive truths of the Reformation became very obvious when in March of 1994, the document Evangelicals and Catholics Together: The Christian Mission in the Third Millennium was released. Drafted by Evangelical Charles Colson and former Lutheran minister turned Roman Catholic priest Richard John Neuhaus, the document stated that Roman Catholics and evangelicals agreed together over the doctrine of justification by grace through faith because of Christ. Strange missing from the statement was the key word "alone." Also, the Catechism of the Catholic Church indicates that Rome's definitions of the words "justification," "grace," and "faith" arc not the same as the biblical definitions taught by the Reformers. Even with such evident distortions, the document was endorsed by many noted Protestant Evangelicals including Richard Land, Os Guinness, Bill Bright, Pat Robertson, and Richard Mouw.

Why were these Evangelical Protestant leaders willing to sign the statement? Were they ignorant of the doctrine of justification? Did they no longer consider justification to be a key Christian doctrine?

Reaction came from all over the Protestant world. Michael Horton pointed out that the lack of the word "alone" made the statement incomplete. Reformed theologian R.C. Sproul stated that the document exposed a serious rift within evangelicalism. Several of the signers were censured by the organizations they represented. At first, the editorial position of Christianity Today was positive toward ECT, but as time passed they too voiced their concerns.

While the ECT document focused the attention of Protestant Evangelicals upon the truths that emerged in the sixteenth century, Reformation. it also indicated how far many of their leaders had strayed from their Reformation heritage.

Has the time come to make a distinction between Reformation Protestants and Evangelical Protestants? I believe so! Drawing lines in the sand is not done for the purpose of promoting sectarian elitism. but rather for the purpose of preserving truth for future generations. There is a great deal at stake. The sixteenth century Reformation restored to the Church vital truths taught in Scripture. To stray from the Reformation is to stray from the truth of God's Word.

Tuesday, October 17, 2006

Calvinists Worse Than Muslims?

Ingrid Schlueter

Jim Bublitz at Old Truth has a post about the recent outrageous comments of the President of Liberty Theological Seminary at Liberty University. What's really horrifying is that this is coming from the head of a Christian educational institution where one would think that scholarship would matter. (Not to mention the commandment about bearing false witness.) Jim Bublitz says it best and he speculates about those Puritan fascists that so worry Ergun Caner and gives us a glimpse of what they might look like. (The Prince of Preachers, Charles Spurgeon, didn't believe in evangelism? Comments like Caner's aren't just malicious, they are laughable. This is academia?)
______________________________________________________________________

At the Calvinist Gadfly web site, Alan Kurschner writes the following:

"Calvinists are worse than Muslims - These are the deplorable words from the loose cannon at Liberty University, Ergun Caner. And since he is unrepentant of making such offensive remarks about God’s people, can there be anything he says hereafter that can be taken with any credibility? And since Jerry Falwell has been silent on these remarks of Ergun’s and has not distanced himself from them, it can be assumed that he condones it."

This is obviously a very sad state of affairs, and many times in situations like these, we can find some relief through the means of good honest humor. So as a response to Dr. Caner, some photos have been made/designed to show the utter foolishness of the remarks he has made.

____________________________________________________________________
By Jim Bublitz

Last week, a convert from Islam, now serving as the seminary President at Jerry Falwell's college, identified a group that he labeled as "worse than Muslims". Who are they? You might be surprised to find out that the Puritans were among them, so was the evangelist George Whitefield, and so was the hymn writer of Amazing Grace. Remember Matthew Henry whose bible commentaries are on most pastor's bookshelves? He's one of them too, as are numerous missionaries and martyrs in church history. If I were Jerry Falwell right about now, I'd be thinking that I have a loose cannon onboard the SS Liberty. This post takes a not-so-politically-correct look at the 'Jihad' that one man brought upon himself with his outrageous behavior.

If you haven't heard about the (now cancelled) formal debate involving
Ergun Caner and James White, you can get caught up by watching the
unofficial video. In the wake of all of that, Ergun Caner of Liberty University posted a set of Q&A's on his blog last week, including this reckless excerpt:

Q: DIDN'T YOU SAY THAT CALVINISTS ARE WORSE THAN MUSLIMS?

A: Yes, absolutely. For a small portion of these people, just daring
to question the Bezian movement is heresy. They will blog and
e-mail incessantly. I call it a "Calvinist Jihad", because just like
Muslims, they believe they are defending the honor of their view.
They can discuss nothing else. I have even had a few call for my
head! Dr. Falwell and I have laughed about it, because they are so
insistent, and they miss the point completely. There are plenty of
schools to which the neo-Calvinists can go, but Liberty will be a
lighthouse for missions and evangelism to the "whosoever wills".
Period. The difference is, Muslims know when to quit -
for these guys, it is the only topic about which they can talk.

The Liberty crew need not be the only ones laughing however, especially amidst the humorously absurd comparisons between Calvinists and Muslims. And lets be honest here, with the world being what it is today, Ergun Caner knows that for most of us - these kind of comparisons are likely to bring to mind these Muslims, and not these. So, what could Ergun Caner possibly be thinking? Perhaps if we could have his thoughts on film, they might look something like this:

"James White is the biggest Jihadist of them all!
He's worse than the most radical Muslims"

"They will stop at nothing short of world domination,
and then they'll prevent Christians everywhere
from reaching out to the whosoever will"

"If we would have had better screening and tighter border security,
we could have kept them out of this land to begin with.
Where was the Coast Guard back in 1620?"

"... but now they've managed to spread their dangerous beliefs,
and labor to pass them on to their children through catechism.
Those poor kids, I can only imagine what they must teach them"

"They only know one way to discuss their
unpopular and outdated views"

"They pedal these Reformation Study Bibles everywhere.
I'm so sick of those study notes reminding us of our
total reliance upon a sovereign God"

"One of them was even called the Prince of Preachers.
A prince is like a dangerous Sultan, right? Whatever!
He was ALWAYS
inciting Jihad"

"This one trains pastors to be Lordship-terrorists
at his destructive Shepherds Conference training grounds"

THE END

In all seriousness, and speaking just for myself, I admit that Ergun Caner
got at least one thing right about Calvinists such as myself:

Though it's not all that I talk about (I spend much more time talking about the Church Growth Movement on this blog), I do love to talk about Calvinism. Why? Not because I want to "defend the honor of my view", but because Calvinism is just a nickname for how I understand God's grace. Isn't saving grace worth discussing, and dwelling on, and thinking about?

So to our brothers at Liberty University, I say: You've had a good Lynchburg-laugh; we've laughed too - at the absurdity of being compared to the followers of a volatile false religion. Let's now get back to talking about the grace of God. After all, if our understanding of that is wrong, how can we expect to be right in our missions and evangelism to the whosoever will?

Tuesday, September 19, 2006

Hyper-Calvinism

The following material is reproduced from Timothy George's book Amazing Grace: God's Initiative--Our Response. According to Dr. George, a Hyper-Calvinist departs from orthodoxy on five key doctrines:

1. Hypers teach the doctrine of eternal justification, which effectively removes human responsibility to respond to the gospel.

2. Hypers deny the free moral agency and responsibility of sinners to repent and believe the gospel.

3. Hypers deny the free offer of the gospel to all people, regardless of whether a person is presumed to be elect or not.

4. Hypers teach that sinners have no warrant to believe in Christ until they feel the evidence of the Spirit's moving in their hearts--in other words, a sinner needs to be convinced he is elect before he has a right to believe.

5. Hypers deny the universal love of God. Hypers claims that God hates sinners and has no meaningful love for the non-elect.

Thursday, August 24, 2006

Calvinism's "Comeback" and the reformation we need


Commentary and observations from Tom Ascol,
Executive Director of Founders Ministries

Christianity Today's current (September 2006) issue has a cover story on the resurgence of reformed theology among the rising generation of American Christians--especially pastors and church leaders. Collin Hansen does a good job describing this reformation movement and highlights some of the men whom God is using in significant ways to fuel its flames.

The article documents what a few people have been saying for the last few years: we are in the early stages of real reformation. Reformed theology certainly is foundational to this reformation, but what is happening should not be dismissed or superficially assessed as simply more people becoming Calvinists than in previous years. From my vantage point God is raising up a generation who are weary of an American evangelicalism that is insipid at best and in truth is more committed to America than it is to the evangel. As Joshua Harris, pastor of Covenant Life Church in Gaithersburg, Maryland is quoted as saying, once it is accepted that "it's not about us, it's about God's glory, it's about his renown ... that's the first step down a path of Reformed theology."

Interestingly, theologian Roger Olson, a self-described "genuine Arminian," makes this comment about his Reformed counterparts: "A lot of us evangelical Arminians agree with them in their criticisms of popular folk religion....I agree with their basic theological underpinnings--that doctrine is important, that grace is the decisive factor in salvation, not a decision we make." My own experience confirms this. Give me a warm-hearted, Wesleyan Arminian any day over the typical, non-descript, atheological evangelical that has dominated American conservative Christianity for the last 50 years. And by all means give me that person over an ungracious, belligerent Calvinist.

There are some statements in the article that are sure to raise eyebrows if not blood pressures. For example, Hansen calls "the [sic--he doesn't get the importance of the definite article!] Southern Baptist Theological Seminary" a "Reformed hotbed." Steve Lemke, provost of New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary, is quoted. Unfortunately, his "white paper" from 2005, that has been rather vigorously debunked on this blog previously (here, here, here and here), is quoted. Dr. Lemke is further cited in what I can at best say is an unfortunate way. If the summation and quote are accurate, then any hope that I had from our previous exchange (see the links above) is completely dissipated.

Hansen writes:
Lemke doubts that Calvinism has yet reached its high-water mark in the SBC. But he is no fan of this trend. Baptism and membership figures, he said, show that the Calvinist churches of the SBC's Founders Ministries lack commitment to evangelism. According to Lemke, the problem only makes sense, given their emphasis on God's sovereign election. "For many people, if they're convinced that God has already elected those who will be elect ... I don't see how humanly speaking that can't temper your passion, because you know you're not that crucial to the process," Lemke explained.

Love hopes he was quoted wrongly. But experience makes me think otherwise. The canard about Founders churches and evangelism has been addressed very decisively. Lemke has better information than he had when he wrote his white paper. He should know better. What we "Founders types" lack is not a commitment to evangelism but a commitment to shallow evangelism that thinks you can save a soul for $48 dollars a month or results in vastly more "converts" that show no signs of life than those who do. We do stand against the kind of evangelism that fills our churches with unregenerate members. But we do not stand against biblical evangelism. Neither did Whitefield, Spurgeon, Boyce, Judson, Carey or Edwards (to name but a few). The fact that Lemke cannot understand how one can believe unconditional election and remain passionate about evangelism tells us far more about him and his theological understanding than it does about evangelical Calvinism. Furthermore, for him to think that because he is not "crucial" to the process of salvation he must therefore be less passionate about evangelism is a serious indictment on his understanding of grace and love.

The article that Hansen has written is well worth reading. It should encourage all who long for spiritual and doctrinal reformation in our churches. By God's grace, such reformation is happening. May God be pleased to cause it to increase.

Wednesday, August 16, 2006

You know you are not Reformed if:










. . . you think the Apostles Creed is the guy who fought Rocky in Rocky I.
. . . you think the Canons of Dort are like the Guns of Navarrone.
. . . you think Ursinus is a nasal condition.
. . . you think Arminians are the people who run convenience stores.
. . . you think the Belgic Confession was from WWII war crimes trials.
. . . you think “popery” in the church makes it smell flowery.
. . . you think the psalter goes with the pepper shaker.
. . . you think unconditional election is a practice of communist dictatorships.
. . . the only “kirk” you know is from Star Trek.
. . . you think the Three Forms of Unity are health, wealth, and happiness.
. . . you think “catechism” and “dogma” relate to pets.
. . . you think Post Tenebras Lux is a breakfast cereal (it’s actually the motto of post-Reformation Geneva).
(h.t. Pat Yamada)