The subject of this post comes after a lot of discussion with others, as well as research on my own in both the Bible and various books from both perspectives. It stems from realizing the contentiousness of the subject, but also the need to address and stay true to what the Bible teaches about God's sovereignty and man's free will.
As a new believer, I was a "Calvinist" and proud of it. I could walk you through TULIP, show verses to back my case, and give lengthy discourses that discussed how illogical any opposing viewpoint was. However over time it became evident that this strategy not only alienated friendships, but served to be more divisive than edifying in discussions with other believers. Some people refer to this as the "Cage Stage". :)
This attitude continued throughout paramedic school. I proudly advocated my position to my Christian classmates. In fact, I would bring up the subject whenever possible, just for the sake of using my proven techniques that had worked so "effectively" in the past. In the end though, God showed me that I was not showing the humility talked about in Philippians 1:1-11. Instead of building others up, my pride was causing a hindrance in my ability to "encourage one another and build up one another" like 1 Thessalonians 5:11 tells Christians to do.
The Lord used this entire experience during medic school to teach that lesson to me. At the very end, while reflecting on the discourses I'd had with others, I realized that I had never truly listened to their arguments. I had read books for the sake of disproving them instead of truly seeing if they were Scripturally based. I approached it from the "This is wrong and here's why" standpoint instead of "Does Scripture teach this?" My motivation was for personal vindication rather than personal growth.
Having been humbled and realizing this fact, I began to reread opposing viewpoints from my new perspective. While reading these, I came to a startling realization that my pride had blinded from me before:
A lot of their arguments were soundly based, if the foundation they were using was accurate.
Please don't misunderstand me here. I'm not saying that I agreed with their conclusions. Rather, I was left realizing that their conclusions were entirely logical if their foundational arguments were to be trusted.
For instance, an author named Austin Fischer dedicated a large portion of his book "Young, Restless, and No longer Reformed" to disproving the "Calvinist" premise that God makes people sin in order to damn them.
"In summary, then, the reprobate are all those humans who will experience a fate dreadful beyond comprehension (hell) as they are eternally punished by God for sins he ordained they would commit before they existed-they were created so they could be damned. If you don't cringe a little, you don't have a pulse" (page 22)
Dave Hunt offers a similar statement when responding to James White in the book, "Debating Calvinism"
"There is no escaping Calvinism's teaching that by 'God's eternal decree' He caused the evil in the brethren's hearts and caused them to execute their evil deeds" (Page 52)
Did Calvinism really teach that? If so, then I was forced to compare that premise to Scripture.
James 1 addresses this very topic in verses 13-18.
"Let no one say when he is tempted,As another example, Hunt also brought up the man from whom Calvinism gets its name, John Calvin. Calvin, while a man who knew and studied Scripture, still believed and taught the unbiblical doctrine of salvation through infant baptism.
'I am being tempted by God'; for God cannot be tempted by evil, and He Himself does not tempt anyone.
But each one is tempted when he is carried away and enticed by his own lust.
Then when lust has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and when sin is accomplished, it brings forth death.
Do not be deceived, my beloved brethren. Every good thing given and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shifting shadow.
In the exercise of His will He brought us forth by the word of truth, so that we would be a kind of first fruits among His creatures."
"God takes his own methods of regenerating...to consecrate infants to himself, and initiate them by a sacred symbol....Circumcision was common to infants before they received understanding" (Calvin, Institutes, IV:xvi, 31)
This teaching also goes against the Biblical doctrine that we are saved by grace, through FAITH (Ephesians 2).
What Hunt and Fischer says is taught by Calvinism is clearly contradicted in Scripture. I may think that the definition presented by them does not truly represent what Calvinism teaches. However, their concerns that some Christians believe that are still worth taking into consideration.
After reading all of the various material presented, I began to realize part of the reason why saying "I'm a Calvinist" had evoked such strong feelings in the past. These facts, coupled with arrogance and pride on my part, had not served to show any reasons to trust anything of what I was saying.
This is why I've decided to say goodbye to "Calvinism." The term "Calvinism" itself carries with it, as shown above, many unbiblical assumptions of which I don't want to be associated with. This also carries with it an inference that "Calvinists" are simply following the teachings of one man, rather than Scripture that preceded the Reformation and Calvin himself.
Instead, I want to be true to what the Word of God says, and nothing more. Do I agree with some things that John Calvin wrote and taught? Probably, although I can honestly say I've never read any of his writings.
Would I agree with the "5-points", which were actually put into place after Calvin's death? Yes I would, based on what I understand the "5 points" to mean. However, as I have shown above, there can be relative meanings assigned to various terms, so defining those terms needs to be done on a personal, not general basis.
To assume that I or someone else, believe exactly like Calvin, Luther, Whitefield, Edwards, Tyndale, MacArthur, Piper, Sproul, Spurgeon, Washer, or any other "Calvinist" often results in inaccurate conclusions about what one believes. Yes, we can learn from these men, but Scripture needs to be the litmus test, not the beliefs of any individual pastor or teacher. Having personal conversations face to face when a question arises often eliminates any such confusion.
By eliminating the label "Calvinism" and using Scripture alone, I have found conversation to be much more rewarding and less confusing without having to clear up any misconceptions of what I believe. (I'd also like to add that the gospel is a simple message. Breaking it into five individual points is limiting in its application when compared to what the Bible says.)
With all of this being said, I can honestly say that I am more convinced than ever of God's sovereignty and control of all things, including salvation. I have not changed my mind regarding what I do believe, but have grown to understand more about what I don't believe. These things that I've shared are not new revelations to me or other people that I know, but their importance has been realized by me over the last 2 months.
Since becoming a Christian, the understanding of how God works has been shown more clearly the more I study Scripture. This includes the responsibility and ability of man to repent, as well as the importance of preaching the gospel so that others might be saved (as 1 Thessalonians 2:15-16 so clearly shows).
How that all works together is a discussion for another time. Our goal for the present needs to be to continually seeking what SCRIPTURE says.
Hebrews 4:12: "For the word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart"
No comments:
Post a Comment