Parchment & Pen Blog

Some Misconceptions about Calvinism


Comments 105 Comments

Calvinism is a system of theology in Christianity that primarily pertains to biblical soteriology, anthropology (doctrine of man), and theology proper (the doctrine of God). It is well established as a part of historic Protestant orthodoxy that finds its theological roots in many of the developments of St. Augustine. It is named after John Calvin, a sixteenth century Protestant reformer, due to his responsibility in systematizing its thoughts. In essence Calvinism believes that the Bible teaches that God is sovereign and man is completely depraved. If man is to be saved, God must save him unconditionally. The only thing that man contributes to his salvation is sin. God, before the beginning of time, elected some people to salvation and not others. This election is based on God’s mysterious sovereign will, not anything in man.

After this terribly brief definition, I would like to cover some misconceptions concerning Calvinism by giving you a list of what Calvinism is not:

Calvinism is not system of theology that denies God’s universal love.

While there are some Calvinists who do deny God’s universal love for all man, this is certainly not a necessary or a central tenet of Calvinism. Calvinists do, however, believe that God has a particular type of love for the elect (an “electing love”), but most also believe that God loves all people (John 3:16). It is a mystery to Calvinist as to why he does not elect everyone. (More on this here.)

Calvinism is not a belief that God creates people in order to send them to hell.

Again, this is not representative of normative Calvinists. While supralapsarians do believe that God creates people to send them to hell, the majority of Calvinists are not supralapsarians. (More on this here.)

Calvinism is not belief that God is the author of evil.

Because of Calvinism’s high view of God’s sovereignty, many mistakenly believe that Calvinists hold God responsible for sin and evil. This is not true. There are very few Calvinists who believe that God is the author of evil. Most Calvinists believe that to ascribe responsibility for evil to God is heretical.

As John Calvin put it:

“. . . the Lord had declared that “everything that he had made . . . was exceedingly good” [Gen. 1:31]. Whence, then comes this wickedness to man, that he should fall away from his God? Lest we should think it comes from creation, God had put His stamp of approval on what had come forth from himself. By his own evil intention, then, man corrupted the pure nature he had received from the Lord; and by his fall drew all his posterity with him into destruction. Accordingly, we should contemplate the evident cause of condemnation in the corrupt nature of humanity-which is closer to us-rather than seek a hidden and utterly incomprehensible cause in God’s predestination. [Institutes, 3:23:8]”

Calvinism is not a belief in fatalism.

A fatalistic worldview is one in which all things are left to fate, chance, and a series of causes and effects that has no intelligent guide or ultimate cause. Calvinism believes that God (not fate) is in control, though Calvinists differ about how meticulous this control is.

Calvinism is not a denial of freedom.

Calvinists to do not believe that people are robots or puppets on strings. Calvinists believe in freedom and, properly defined, free will. While Calvinists believe that God is ultimately in control of everything, most are compatibalists, believing that he works in and with human freedom (limited though it may be). Calvinists believe in human responsibility at the same time as holding to a high view of God’s providential sovereignty. (More on this here.)

Calvinism is not a belief that God forces people to become Christians against their will.

Calvinists believe in what is called “irresistible grace.” This might not be the best name for it since it does not really communicate what is involved. Calvinists believe that people are dead in the sin (Eph 2:1), haters of God, with no ability to seek him in their natural state (Rom 3:11; John 6:44; 1 Cor 2:14). Since this is the case, God must first regenerate them so that they can have faith. Once regenerate, people do not need to be forced to accept God, but this is a natural reaction—a willing reaction—of one who has been born again and, for the first time, recognizes the beauty of God.

Calvinism is not a belief that you should only evangelize the elect.

No one knows who the elect are. I suppose that if there was a way to find out, both Calvinist and Arminians (the other primary option to Calvinism) would only evangelize the elect (since Arminians also believe only the elect will be saved even though they understand election differently). Since we don’t know, it is our duty to evangelize all people and nations. Some of the greatest evangelists in the history of Christianity, such as Charles Haddon Spurgeon and Jonathan Edwards, have held to the doctrine of unconditional election.

Calvinism is not a belief that God arbitrarily chooses people to be saved.

Calvinists believe that God elects some people to salvation and not others and that this election is not based on anything present or foreseen, righteous or unrighteous, in the individual, but upon his sovereign choice. But this does not mean that the choice is arbitrary, as if God is flipping a coin to see who is  saved and who is not. Calvinists believe that God has his reasons, but they are in his mysterious secret will.

Calvinism is not a system of thought that follows a man, John Calvin.

While Calvinists obviously respect John Calvin, they simply believe that he correctly understood and systematized some very important Apostolic teachings concerning election, man’s condition, and God’s sovereignty. However, much of this understanding did not originate with John Calvin, but can be seen in many throughout church history such as Aquinas, Anselm, and Augustine. Ultimately, Calvinists will argue, they follow rightly interpreted Scripture.

Calvinism is not a system that has to ignore or reinterpret passages of Scripture concerning human responsibility.

Calvinists believe that all people are responsible to do what is right, even though, as fallen children of Adam, they lack ability to do what is right (in a transcendent sense; see below) without God’s regenerating grace. Therefore, God’s call and commands apply to all people and all people are responsible for their rejection and rebellion.

Calvinists do not believe that no one can do any good thing at all.

Calvinists believe in what is called “total depravity” (so do Arminians). However, total depravity does not mean that people cannot ever do anything good. Calvinists believe that unregenerate people can do many good things and sometimes even act better than Christians. But when it comes to people’s disposition toward God and their acknowledgment of him for their abilities, gifts, and future, they deny him and therefore taint all that they are and do. An unbeliever, for example, can love and care for their children just as a believer can. In and of itself this is a very good thing. However, in relation to God this finds no eternal or transcendent favor since they are at enmity with him, the Giver of all things. Therefore, it might be said, while all people can do good, only the regenerate can do transcendent good.

Calvinists do not necessarily believe that God predestines (wills) everything, including the color of socks I chose this morning.

There is a spectrum to belief about God’s sovereignty in Calvinism. The one thing that unites all Calvinists is their belief in God’s sovereign choice to elect some people to salvation and not others. However, Calvinists differ concerning God’s involvement in other areas (for more on this, see here). Some Calvinists believe in what might be called “meticulous sovereignty”, where God has not only predestined people to salvation, but also he has predestined everything that occurs. As the old saying goes: “There is not a maverick molecule in the universe.” However, most Calvinists believe in what might be called “providential sovereignty.” Here, Calvinists would distinguish between God’s permissive will and his sovereign will. In his permissive will, many things happen that he permits, but is not necessarily bringing about as the first cause. In his sovereign will, many things happen because of his direct intervention (for more on this, see here).

Similar Posts:

 

105 Comments

  1. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0

    Definitely. Sad day when our theology lacks mystery and we finally look God in the eye. We all need a good dose of Tozer there!

  2. Garrick says:

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0

    If we would all become Molinists, we could stop arguing about all this. :-)

  3. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0

    [...] amongst Reformed folks the extent of God's providence and one is not required to affirm "meticulous sovereignty" where God actively micromanages every event through His decretive will–COLLAPSE WAVE [...]

  4. TIM says:

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0

    @ Kevin Jackson
    > In what meaningful way does God love the reprobate in Calvinism? The reprobate would be much better off
    > never having been born…

    @ bossmanham
    > Wouldn’t it have been better for them to have not been born? It just seems like a failure to follow out the logical conclusion of a belief.

    Let’s read Scripture and see where it goes.

    Jesus Himself said it would have been better if some (Judas, even) had not been born. Matt 26:24. [So you're right!]
    Yet God made Judas, did He not? Why?
    And God sovereignly *predestined* Judas for that role, did He not? Read Acts 4:24-28. Then read all of Ps 109. Peter applied this passage specifically to Judas (Acts 1:16). Even in Ps 109, the Messiah says He gave love (to Judas).

    God loves the reprobate by giving them ~70 years of earthly blessings (sun, rain, families, etc Matt 5:45) and a shot at the Gospel (Mk 10:21). The Bible handles the eternal question of ‘love’ separately. We should too.

    ****

    But it gets worse:

    **Carefully** read Matt 11:20-27, and realize the following statements are true:
    - Jesus knew *in advance* that He could have saved Sodom & G, but *HE* chose not to (cf Gen 19:24)
    - Jesus knew *in advance* that these towns would not believe (cf John 6:64)
    - Yet Jesus ‘worked’ those towns, knowing full well it would ONLY serve to further condemn them to worse Judgment than S&G!! Why??
    - And then turned around and THANKED God for *hiding* the truth from them!!! Why?

    Now…

  5. TIM says:

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0

    (Cont’d)

    Because Jesus knew their belief in advance yet still chose to preach there, there can only be one conclusion: Jesus intended for them to receive a worse fate on the day of Judgment! The blood does run cold.. but what other possible outcome could Jesus expect? (to get technical, whether this was part of election/predestination or not is irrelevant: He knew they would reject Him, yet He still preached. Matt 11 renders the question of their freewill as immaterial.)

    Since Jesus knew what the outcome was, can we actually say this was His intent?

    Yes. And He not only sees it as His intent (by logic), He explicitly states it was *God’s* intent and *thanks* God for bringing about His “good pleasure” and “gracious will” – a will that resulted in worse condemnation for Capernaum, Chorzain and Bethsaida.
    At that time Jesus declared, “I thank you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that you have hidden these things from the wise and understanding and revealed them to little children; yes, Father, for such was your gracious will. (Matt 11:25-26)

    Why would Jesus do such a thing?

    Please re-read Rom 9:18-24.

    I don’t “like” it, and it certainly makes my blood run cold.

    But what other possible explanation could there be? Every other attempt I’ve heard people try and make invariably denies that God’s will and Jesus’ actions are in concert, willing for and resulting in further condemnation of these towns.

    After all – He could have simply…

More Comments:

1 2 3

Post a Comment
Rules: 1000 character limit; one comment at a time, be nice, no self-promotion








 

 characters available

Sponsors

Follow Michael Patton On:

      

What is Your View of the End Times?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Receive Blog via Email

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Categories

Buy Anything on Amazon & Support our Ministry

Blog Rules

Please adhere to the following rules to prevent banishment to Siberia (no offense to our Siberian visitors):

  • Do not use the blog to promote yourself, as your surrogate blog, or as an advertisement. I am sure you are interesting and have some really nice things to say, but you can get your own blog.
  • Do not call authors out for debate. You must count the cost (Lk. 14:31). You don’t want to get whipped up on anyway.
  • Keep your comments short. Like when your comments are longer than the blog, that is too long.
  • Read All 6 Rules

Search Parchment & Pen

Donate

If you believe in and benefit from this ministry, please consider becoming a parter by donating here. One-time and monthly donors are both greatly appreciated!

Get Email Updates Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon

For Email Marketing you can trust

Our Classes

Theological Word of the Day

Canon of Scripture
(Greek kanon, “rule” or “measuring rod”) In Christian theology, the term canon is used to describe the accepted books of the Old and New Testament. Protestants, Catholics, and Orthodox all have the same twenty-seven book New Testament canon, but will differ with regard to the Old Testament canon. Catholics universally accept what are called the [...] continue reading