There are 8 thoughts on “Confronting Five-Point Calvinism”.

  1. Thanks, Lou. I think you are right that even Calvinists hope for a different God than the one they describe. I have recently gone back to the Christian Reformed Church that I attended for a couple of years (at my husband’s request – he loves this church, and it does have a wonderful Pastor)…but, the focus there is not really on TULIP, but rather on how to live as God would have us live. It is on love and helping others. From that perspective, worship there is very friendly. Probably, not what one would expect of a Reformed Church.

    Sorry about throwing in the O.T. references. That’s just something that has been on my mind, lately. I’m beginning to resolve those issues of how and why the God of the Old and New Testaments seem so different.

    Appreciate your feedback, as always.

  2. Marsha:

    When I indicated that Calvinist stress divine sovereignty ends up demeaning God, I did not have in mind the stories found in the Old Testament that describe such things as divine retribution for sin, some of which are grim from our current perspective. What one finds in the Old Testament are very old accounts of God’s providential care for his people, if they obey the covenant they have made with him, and then some very barbed accounts of the costs of failure to keep the commandments both as a society and as individuals. Calvinists, of course, find proof texts in these accounts to support their theology, but TULIP is not derived from historical narratives.

    Elements of classical theism as laid down by theologians and churchman (and to some extent frozen in the great ecumenical creeds and later confession) are the background assumptions of the Calvinist insistence on turning God into a puppet-master in which human beings are predestined to do what they do at the moment of creation (out of nothing). Five-Point Calvinism is one of the unfortunate conclusions flowing from and dependent upon classical theism; it is an rigorous effort to generate a coherent account of God understood as a First Thing that explains everything. It is not, however, taught in the Gospels or the fruit of an actual encounter with a divine friend and merciful companion, since Calvinists have most often closed the door to divine special revelations other than those reported in the New Testament.

    There is a certain logic to all of this. A First Cause or Prime Mover is not the responsive, forgiving, loving, caring friend of human beings, but an explanation for the way things are and cannot but be–hence predestination and so forth. Those who adopt a TULIP-type theology are, in my experience, certain that they were chosen at the moment of creation. Those who hold a competing understanding of divine and human things were not so fortunate. This stance seems to me to be an exercise in human pride, despite the very low opinion of human potential and worth built into Calvinism and its ideological roots. I would be more sympathetic with those who insist on TULIP if they would indicate that some who entertain their understanding of divine things were themselves not predestined to salvation, but for no reason whatever, other than the inscrutable will of God, destined to be enemies of God from the moment time and space were created out of nothing.

    However, I respect the often deep piety of Calvinists far too much to believe what they say. I suspect that even a most ardent Five-Point Calvinist, when faced with the evils of this world, and in desperation approaches God in prayer, hopes and even expects that God is not as is pictured in Calvinist theology, but is, instead, a passionate, loving sentient moral agent genuinely able to listen and respond to desperate pleadings. They may, with me and most other Christians, have a hope that the Holy One of Israel will take pity on our suffering, and perhaps even mercifully change for the better the way things will eventually turn out. Put another way, even Calvinists, I trust, sometimes long for God to do things their theology renders impossible or even ridiculous.

    This is true despite a theology that does not permit a merciful response from the God of their theology. What one actually hopes and longs to see take place from a merciful God who listens to the longings of the crushed hearts of suffering humanity tells us more about their sometimes impressive piety than does their formal theology. Both proximately and ultimately our deeds count more with God than the words found in our puny efforts at formal theology, creeds, and clever systems. I expect that even rock hard Calvinists will be redeemed by a loving God who is anxious and able to purge the pride from the worst of us, if we will just turn to him and trust him and his Way.

  3. Hi Lou…
    Calvinism is a terrible doctrine. I was very involved in it for awhile.
    But, what I really wanted to ask you about was this comment you made in your article….

    “Insisting on divine sovereignty in such a very loud voice may end up actually demeaning the divine. This problem seems to me to stem from a fascination with what is now sometimes called classical theism, where what is attributed to God makes it impossible for him to be loving, gentle, and merciful.”

    This is so true, but I have, recently, thought this could also be true of the God of the Old Testament, who seems very authoritative and commits horrible acts of destruction against various peoples. I really struggle with that.

    I did enjoy reading your article. Calvinism turns people into puppets and completely takes away any responsibility for anything man does. How can God punish people who have no choice but to sin? No choice, unless they are chosen by Him. Takes away all culpability from man and puts it on God.

  4. We know that TULIP calvinism is contrary to the Bible. 1 Tim. 4:2 states that God wants ALL men to be saved. This shows that god has not chosen a select few to be the Elect and the rest damned. The famous Jn. 3:16 likewise shows that salvation is offered to all. See also 2 Jn. 2:2, Heb. 2:9, etc…

  5. Thanks for the concise and pointed review, Lou. It is reassuring to know that other Christians are constructively engaged in the discussion with our five-point friends.

    • Eric:

      I am pleased that this little review has been both noticed and appreciated. For several reasons I find this kind of conservative Protestant literature both interesting and valuable. We can and should learn from encounters with solid evangelical scholarship.

  6. It’s a pleasure to be Lou’s across the fence backyard neighbor. We always enjoy his writings/conversations/home teaching visits.

Add Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

 characters available

All comments are moderated to ensure respectful discourse. It is assumed that it is possible to disagree agreeably and intelligently and comments that intend to increase overall understanding are particularly encouraged. Individual authors are given the option to disallow commenting or end commenting after a certain period at their discretion.

Close this window

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This