This post is part of my series Life as a Calvinist in the SBC.

There once lived a man who held firmly to Calvinist theology. He believed the five points were fully biblical and took advantage of every possible opportunity to share Calvinism with the people at his church. He also had a growing conviction that evangelism was not a responsibility of believers. Since salvation is in the hands of God and God is guaranteed to save all those whom he has chosen, that leaves no room for human involvement through evangelism. He thought that evangelism did a disservice to God since in evangelism, the one witnessing claims some of the credit for saving people. Because of his view of evangelism, he always refused to participate in any evangelistic work and he encouraged other church members to adopt the same position. He never went on a mission trip, never gave to missions, never shared the gospel.

I wonder if you have ever met a person like this? Me either. While I know such people have existed and do exist, they are the exception, not the norm. The belief that evangelism is not part of the Christian life is not Calvinism, it is hyper-Calvinism.

Read the rest of this entry »

This post is part of my series Life as a Calvinist in the SBC.

An old joke tells of a man who walked into a barber shop one day for a shave. He went in, got his shave, and went on about his business. A day went by, then two, then three, and the man’s face remained clean shaven. He was astonished and finally returned to the barber shop and asked what had happened. The lady working asked him to describe the person who gave him the shave. “Oh, that was Grace who shaved you,” she responded. “She’s new here, but we’ve found that once you’ve been shaved by Grace, you never need to be shaved again!”

Such is the Calvinist doctrine of the perseverance of the saints: once saved, always saved. Once chosen by God, bought by Christ, and regenerated by the Spirit, we are eternally secure. We cannot give up our own salvation, and nothing can take it from us.

Read the rest of this entry »

This post is part of my series Life as a Calvinist in the SBC.

A few days behind schedule, but here at long last is the fourth point from the T.U.L.I.P. acronym. The post for the final point has already been written and will be posted tomorrow at 6:30 am. After that, just a few more posts to tie up some loose ends, and this series will be history!

I once heard the story of a man who had faced a lifelong addiction to cigarettes. From time to time he would try to quit, but every attempt would result in quick failure. Then one day he changed his approach and began to pray earnestly for God to remove his taste for cigarettes. To his delight, God answered his prayer and what he once found irresistible he now found revolting. Whereas once he could not help but pick up a cigarette, now he could not make himself smoke one.

We hear stories such as these and rejoice at God’s mercy to remove sinners from their sins and temptations. Rarely will anyone say, “What? God changed this man’s desires so that he hates what he once loved and thus compelled him away from cigarettes? What a violation of this man’s free will!” Yet this is precisely the charge often leveled against Calvinists for their doctrine of irresistible grace.

Read the rest of this entry »

This post is part of my series Life as a Calvinist in the SBC.

Well, I fell behind. This has been a busy week, not the least because my wife and I celebrated our eighth anniversary this week (I love you, Sandra!). There is a fair chance that tomorrow’s post will also need to be delayed, so we will see at least one, perhaps two, of the posts on the five points put off until next week.

The most hotly debated point in Calvinism is Limited Atonement. If someone describes himself as a four-point Calvinist, you can bet this is the missing point. The concern is understandable. God’s love for all people is clear from Scripture, as is the universal call of the gospel and God’s desire to save the lost. It can seem difficult to reconcile God’s love and offer of salvation with the Calvinist claim that Jesus’ work on the cross does not extend to every individual in the same way. Nonetheless, it has often surprised me that Limited Atonement has caught so much flack. Before jumping into a longer discussion, let me summarize the view.

Read the rest of this entry »

This post is part of my series Life as a Calvinist in the SBC.

Several thousand years ago, a man in the wilderness city of Haran heard the voice of the Lord. This voice said to him, Go from your country and your kindred and your father’s house to the land that I will show you. And I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing. (Genesis 12:1-2) Thus began God’s eternal relationship with Abraham and his descendants.

God’s election of Israel is one of the clearest biblical demonstrations of sovereign, unconditional election. Abraham was not chosen because he was seeking God. In fact, we are never told why God chooses Abraham. Some time later (Deuteronomy 7:7-8), God would say to Abraham’s descendants, It was not because you were more in number than any other people that the LORD set his love on you and chose you, for you were the fewest of all peoples, but it is because the LORD loves you and is keeping the oath that he swore to your fathers, that the LORD has brought you out with a mighty hand and redeemed you from the house of slavery, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt. His faithfulness to the later Israelites was due to his faithfulness to Abraham, but we are not told why he chose Abraham.

Read the rest of this entry »

This post is part of my series Life as a Calvinist in the SBC.

This week, I will be presenting the five points of Calvinism. I hope to do one each day, having the post online by 6:30 AM as usual. But as this is a pretty busy week for me and the posts are usually written the night before, there is a chance that I will fall behind. I will probably not try to double any of these up but will just continue the five points next week, if needed.

In this post, I will look at the Calvinist view of Total Depravity. In this point, Calvinists affirm the biblical teaching that all human beings are born into a state of sinful corruption, a corruption so pervasive that it affects everything we do so that no action of natural, unsaved human beings can ever be called truly good in the eyes of God.

Read the rest of this entry »

This post is part of my series Life as a Calvinist in the SBC.

In 1956, professional golfer Walter Hagen delivered the following advice: “You’re only here for a short visit. Don’t hurry. Don’t worry. And be sure to smell the flowers along the way.” Stop and smell the flowers. It’s finally time for us to smell the flowers. And despite the advice given by Ringo Starr in 1981, it’s not roses that we will smell. Tulips are the flower of choice.

“Of making many books on predestination,” the Preacher almost says, “there is no end.” Many books have been and will be written on the Calvinistic doctrine of predestination. A series of blog posts such as this can only scratch the surface of the doctrine. But scratching the surface is often enough to give a good, general understanding of these beliefs. Because of this, many Calvinists have found it helpful to explain Calvinist beliefs by using the TULIP acronym. But where did TULIP come from?

Read the rest of this entry »

This post is part of my series Life as a Calvinist in the SBC.

Two comments before moving into the body of this post.

First, today is a two-for-one day. I’ve been limiting myself to pushing out one post per weekday, but I’m going to go ahead and do two today. The second post will be a look at the acronym TULIP and its usage within Calvinism. That will set me up for five posts next week on the five points. That way I can cover all the points in a single week (assuming I don’t get behind!).

Second, I debated whether or not to write this post. In this series, I want to clearly state what I believe, which at times means stating what I disagree with and why I disagree with it. But I want to avoid an us-versus-them mentality. I fully believe Calvinists and non-Calvinists can live and minister together in the SBC. But such cooperation and life together will be impossible if all we do is stand on our own sides and hurl accusations at each other. In this post, I will be pointing out some things that have been said that I think are less than helpful. I hope I do not come across in a separatist, accusatory way. Rather, I want to address some attitudes which I think are obstacles to unity.

Read the rest of this entry »

This post is part of my series Life as a Calvinist in the SBC.

Clark Pinnock died on August 15, 2010. Upon his death, many blogs and media sources reflected on the life and times of this great evangelical scholar. Wait – evangelical scholar? Despite his influential conservatism in his early years, Pinnock shifted quickly and fully into liberal brands of theology, eventually becoming one of the great defenders of open theism. Was he really evangelical? The short answer is no, Pinnock was not an evangelical. But the term evangelical has been twisted and expanded to embrace a wide range of people who were once simply called liberal. The term evangelical has been distorted almost beyond usefulness.

While it is a necessary truth that language will change and evolve over time, it is not true that the evolution of language means we can take a casual approach to the meaning of words. With all due respect to Alanis Morrisett, the word ironic does not mean the same thing as the word coincidence. And with all due respect to a surprising number of Southern Baptists, the word Calvinist does not mean the same thing as non-Calvinist.

It is possible to have variations of belief within a single label. Most labels are not monolithic in that you must take the whole thing or you can’t claim any of it. Calvinism is no exception. Limiting our focus to soteriology, not all Calvinists believe the same thing about every aspect of salvation. Nonetheless, there comes a point when variation becomes so great that a person’s beliefs are better described by a different label.

In my last post, I differentiated the Baptist usage of Reformed versus Calvinist and said that the term Calvinist has come to mean a view of salvation similar to that of John Calvin or, more specifically, to the later canons of Dordt which established the five points of Calvinism. To be a Calvinist is to believe that God sovereignly chooses whom he will save from among human beings, all of whom are completely sinful. God’s choice is made without regard to anything in that person – no merit of work or belief causes God to choose him. Because he is chosen, he receives the atoning work of Christ at the cross, is irresistibly drawn to Christ through the regeneration of his will, and is kept eternally secure. There is a little room for variation, but not much.

Some variation is possible for those four-point Calvinists who reject Limited Atonement. Personally, I am surprised that this point catches so much controversy. I suspect that much of the disagreement is based on a misunderstanding of what limited atonement really means. I consider the doctrine to be essential for both Calvinists and non-Calvinists (I’ll say more on this in a few posts). But a person might reject this point yet hold to the rest of the Calvinistic view of salvation and still be a Calvinist.

On the other hand, the person who claims to be a three point Calvinist has usually deviated from any meaningful use of the term Calvinist. Three pointers (who sometimes refer to themselves as moderate Calvinists and call the five pointers extreme Calvinists) usually reject Limited Atonement and Irresistible Grace and the other three points are redefined. Total depravity is given a large footnote. Unconditional election becomes conditional foreknowledge. Perseverance of the saints is generally maintained in a Calvinistic form. The result is a system of theology which resembles neither the canons of Dordt nor the teachings of Calvin.

A person cannot reject the view that God chooses whom he will save, regenerates them, gives them faith, and does all this despite their ongoing rejection and rebellion, while claiming to be a Calvinist. There is no meaningful way to claim Calvinism while believing that election is God choosing those who choose him. This view of salvation contradicts the views of Calvin and Dordt.

I don’t know why some people wish to refer to themselves as moderate or three-point Calvinists. It would be helpful for these beliefs to be given a different label, one which articulates their views while showing the distinction from Calvinism. In my next post, I will talk about some possible labels and why one label – Baptist – should not be seen as the preferred alternative to either Calvinism or Arminianism.

This post is part of my series Life as a Calvinist in the SBC.

One disclaimer as I move into this discussion. While I love church history and have a basic knowledge of many events, I do not have a comprehensive knowledge of all the events described below. From my study and the resources I’ve consulted I believe all the historical information below is correct. I don’t feel qualified to argue over many points of Baptist origins, so I will skirt around issues such as our connection to the Radical Reformation. But I will jump into hot water on the matter of the history of Reformed theology in the SBC.

Read the rest of this entry »