Fear and Trembling

I have taken several months off from blogging.  I have used the time to prepare a series of Sunday School Lessons on J. I. Packer’s wonderful little book Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God .  I will lead a discussion of this book at my little church in Troy, TN .  I want to put in a plug for this book. One of the things that put me off of Calvinism when I was first introduced to the doctrines of grace was the idea that Calvinism destroyed the motive for evangelism and missions.  It took a long time for me to come around.  There are many others who reject Calvinism for the same reasons. Packer is clear in his book that the “antinomy” between God’s sovereignty (God’s control of all things) and man’s free will (man’s freedom of choice) is a mystery that will not be completely sorted out in this life.  Along with others, (see John Piper’s short article here , and a discussion by R. C. Sproul in Chosen by God ), I am somewhat troubled with the use o...

Christian mission work involves the sharing of the gospel in places where it has not been shared before, or at least where most people do not understand it.  We can get guidance for Christian Missions from what some would consider an unlikely source: The Canons of the Synod of Dort. The Canons of Dort came out of the Synod of Dort, held from 1618-1619 in the Netherlands. Theologians wrote them in order to counter the teaching of James Arminius, and they outline the system of theology known by many today as the “five points of Calvinism.”  However, the Canons of Dort contain much more than five simple points (sometimes summarized by the acronym TULIP, or total depravity, unconditional election, limited atonement, irresistible grace and the perseverance of the saints). Turning to the Canons: This death of God's Son is the only and entirely complete sacrifice and satisfaction for sins; it is of infinite value and worth, more than sufficient to atone for the sins of the...

From George Whitefield: The doctrines of our election, and free justification in Christ Jesus are daily more and more pressed upon my heart. They fill my soul with a holy fire and afford me great confidence in God my Savior. I hope we shall catch fire from each other, and that there will be a holy emulation amongst us, who shall most debase man and exalt the Lord Jesus. Nothing but the doctrines of the Reformation can do this. All others leave free will in man and make him, in part at least, a Savior to himself. . . . I know Christ is all in all. Man is nothing: he hath a free will to go to hell, but none to go to heaven, till God worketh in him to will and to do of His good pleasure. Oh the excellency of the doctrine of election and of the saints' final perseverance! I am persuaded, till a man comes to believe and feel these important truths, he cannot come out of himself, but when convinced of these, and assured of their application to his own heart, he then ...

Adrain Warnock has a great post on the fact that Calvinism and Arminianism run across a spectrum . I find myself residing somewhere between the Moderate and Strong Calvinist positions as listed. Personal responsibility is important to me, and I believe it to be important to all biblically consistent five point Calvinists.

Justin Taylor’s blog reprinted one of my favorite quotes on Calvinism: Some readers will recall the conversation between Calvinist Charles Simeon (1759-1836) and Arminian John Wesley (1703-1791) about their commonality amidst the controversy: [Simeon] 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? [Wesley] Yes, I do indeed. [Simeon] 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? [Wesley] Yes, solely through Christ. [Simeon] But, Sir, supposing you were at first saved by Christ, are you not somehow or other to sa...

I had occasion last night to read through parts of the Cannons of Dort for a Bible study class at my church. The Cannons of Dort were written by the Synod of Dort in 1618-19. They lay out the system of doctrine that has been known as ‘Five-point Calvinism’ ever since. We are doing the Amazing Grace study, and one of the sections is Calvinism vs. Arminianism, which concentrates on the Synod of Dort (see here , here and here for information on this synod). I was once again struck by the way in which Dort defined the issues. One of the bitterest criticisms of Five-point Calvinism that has been leveled has been the idea that it undermines evangelism. I find this criticism hard to justify in view of these statements: Cannons of the Synod of Dort: The First Main Point of Doctrine, Article 3: The Preaching of the Gospel In order that people may be brought to faith, God mercifully sends proclaimers of this very joyful message to the people he wishes and at the time he wishes...

"I once heard the president of a Presbyterian seminary declare, 'I am not a Calvinist because I do not believe that God brings some people, kicking and screaming against their wills, into the kingdom, while he excludes others from his kingdom who desperately want to be there.' I was astonished when I heard these words. I did not think it possible that the president of a Presbyterian seminary could have such a gross misconception of his own church's theology. He was reciting a caricature which was as far away from Calvinism as one could get. Calvinism does not teach and never has taught that God bring people kicking and screaming into the kingdom or has ever excluded anyone who wanted to be there. Remember that the cardinal point of the Reformed doctrine of predestination rests on the biblical teaching of man's spiritual death. Natural man does not want Christ. He will only want Christ if God plants a desire for Christ in his heart. Once that desire is plante...

Continuing a Presbyterian layman’s critique of Whosoever Will: A Biblical-Theological Critique of Five-Point Calvinism by David L. Allen and Steve Lemke , I want to look into the verse most often quoted against Calvinism in Baptist circles. That verse is John 3:16, “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him shall not perish, but have everlasting life” (KJV). Jerry Vines uses this verse in a crass way against Calvinism on page 14: “The phrase ‘that whosoever believes” responds to five-point Calvinism, which says Christ died only for the elect.” Once again, a Baptist sets up a straw man of Calvinism to be knocked down by his relentless logic. Calvinists believe that God loves the whole world (everyone) in some sense. We believe that the love God has for the world is the reason that God sent His only Son to die. We believe that Christ’s death was enough to pay the penalty for everyone’s sins such that anyone who does believe on ...

I am starting a series of posts on the subject of Calvinism. My intent is to use the book Whosoever Will: A Biblical-Theological Critique of Five-Point Calvinism by David L. Allen and Steve Lemke as a foil. I will present future posts in the form of a dialogue between a Calvinist informed by various books and a non-Calvinist informed by the contents of the book in question. This post is a brief summary of my position on the topic. I am not out to prove anything here so much as to present a summary of my beliefs. The arguments for and against my position will come as I move into the series. I believe that human beings are born in a state of bondage to sin. We simply do not want to do good things from pure motives. We do not do good things because we do not want to. We do not choose to place our faith in Christ because that would involve an admission that we are inadequate on our own to earn salvation and a submission to Christ’s authority as the Lord of our lives. We would have...

Follow the conversation between Charles Simeon and John Wesley here .

John Calvin, a Sixteenth Century leader of the Protestant Reformation, is a well-known theologian. Calvin is well known for his teaching on divine election, the idea that God sovereignty chooses who will have faith in Christ. In many churches, Calvin is an arch villain who tried to stop evangelism. After all, if God chooses, why should we witness? That is John Calvin as many know him: the stern teacher of election. But what they probably do not know is that Calvin was the leader of one of the largest, most successful church-planting movements in history. Calvin became a Protestant in 1531 at age 22. He soon left his native Paris, France, because of persecution. Most of Calvin’s work was performed in his new home of Geneva, Switzerland. Calvin and The City Council of Geneva had many conflicts. At one point, Calvin was even run out of town. He was asked to return, and after a few years most of his reforms were accepted by The City Council in about 1554. Protestants from all over Europe f...

Between Two Worlds passes on a definition of Hyper-Calvinism that I wish some of my Calvinist friends on the internet would read. Here’s a part: A hyper-Calvinist is someone who either: Denies that the gospel call applies to all who hear, OR Denies that faith is the duty of every sinner, OR Denies that the gospel makes any "offer" of Christ, salvation, or mercy to the non-elect (or denies that the offer of divine mercy is free and universal), OR Denies that there is such a thing as "common grace," OR Denies that God has any sort of love for the non-elect. All five varieties of hyper-Calvinism undermine evangelism or twist the gospel message.

Camp on This gives some great quotes on election. Two are reproduced below with my comments. "Let us remember, on the other hand, that while life is promised universally to all who believe in Christ, still faith is not common to all. For Christ is made known and held out to the view of all, but the elect alone are they whose eyes God opens, that they may seek him by faith. Here, too, is displayed a wonderful effect of faith; for by it we receive Christ such as he is given to us by the Father -- that is, as having freed us from the condemnation of eternal death, and made us heirs of eternal life, because, by the sacrifice of his death, he has atoned for our sins, that nothing may prevent God from acknowledging us as his sons. Since, therefore, faith embraces Christ, with the efficacy of his death and the fruit of his resurrection, we need not wonder if by it we obtain likewise the life of Christ." -John Calvin I once heard Jerry Vines say that the gates of heaven had a messag...

Ligonier Ministries blog posts a section from one of R. C. Sproul’s books on election : We conclude that fallen man is still free to choose what he desires, but because his desires are only wicked he lacks the moral ability to come to Christ. As long as he remains in the flesh, unregenerate, he will never choose Christ. He cannot choose Christ precisely because he cannot act against his own will. He has no desire for Christ. He cannot choose what he does not desire. His fall is great. It is so great that only the effectual grace of God working in his heart can bring him to faith. Sproul’s approach to election leaves a man responsible for his choice because he chooses according to his own desires. He can be called to account for his rejection of Christ because nothing outside of him causes him to choose as he does. He is responsible before God to repent of his sins and believe the gospel. Sproul also accurately describes a man’s bent toward evil. Men will not choose Christ without the i...

I am reading a book by Max Lucado called 3:16: The Numbers Of Hope . Well, really I am listening to it on tape. I am finding this to be encouraging devotional listening. I especially like his discussion of the “whosoever” and “whoever” passages of the Bible, including John 3:16 , the focus of the book. He references Mt. 10:32 , Mt. 10:39 , Mk. 3:35 , Mk. 16:16 , Jn. 3:36 , Jn. 4:14 , Jn. 6:37 , Jn. 11:26 , and Rev. 22:17 . To which I would add Isaiah 1:18-20 , Isaiah 55:1, 6-7 ; Hosea 6:1 , Mt. 11:28 , and Rev. 3:20 (Note that Rev. 3:20 refers to Christians; they can come too.). Lucado is expansive: Whoever unfurls 3:16 as a banner for the ages. Whoever unrolls the welcome mat of heaven to humanity. Whoever invites the world to God. Jesus could have so easily narrowed the scope … but he used no qualifier. The pronoun is wonderfully indefinite. After all, who isn’t a whoever . Whoever makes it clear: God exports his grace worldwide. For those who attempt to restrict it, Jesus has a...

On the election discussion, I leave you all with John Newton , author of Amazing Grace : “...You have objections to the doctrine of election. You will however, agree with me, that the Scripture does speak of it, and that in very strong and express terms; particularly St. Paul … Admitting, as I am sure you will admit, the total depravity of human nature, how can we account for the conversion of a soul to God, unless we likewise admit to an election of grace? The work must begin somewhere. Either the sinner first seeks the Lord, or the Lord first seeks the sinner ... In your own case you acknowledge he began with you; and it must be the case universally to all that are called, if the whole race of mankind are by nature enemies to God … What has made us differ from our former selves? Grace. What has made us differ from those who are as we once were? Grace … They who believe there is any power in man by nature, whereby he can turn to God, may contend for a conditional election, upon the fo...

An interesting quote from R. C. Sproul over at Between Two Worlds : …My point is that there is confusion about what the doctrine of limited atonement actually teaches. However, I think that if a person really understands the other four points and is thinking at all clearly, he must believe in limited atonement because of what Martin Luther called a resistless logic. Still, there are people who live in a happy inconsistency. I believe it's possible for a person to believe four points without believing the fifth, although I don't think it's possible to do it consistently or logically. However, it is certainly a possibility given our proclivity for inconsistency… Sproul’s approach has always been inconsistent with many people’s miss-conception of Five Point Calvinism. I think R. C. puts forth the doctrine clearly and well , and I agree with him. The idea is very distinct from what Baptist history knows as “high Calvinism” (put down within Baptist circles by Andrew Fuller) or...