The Good - Part 1

This post is about the good in the Calvinistic resurgence. First, they have brought theology back into the fore. People are discussing doctrine again and reading books about it. They really want the mind to be informed in ways that didn't seem as noticeable a generation ago. Second, Calvinists have helped to recover a big view of God.

John Piper did a series explaining and defending Calvinism. He begins by talking about the recovery of this big vision of God. He mentions how every generation needs a J.B. Philips who wrote Your God is too Small. Sometimes one may rightly ask what exactly is meant by a "BIG" view of God? I would explain it basically as realizing God is not casual, familiar, fluffy cute and cuddly. One cannot relate to Him in a light, flippant kind of way. If one sees a fraction of God is it changes everything. The Hebrews feared God so much they would not even speak His full name. If someone can think of God, without some sense of awe, fear, wonder, speechlessness ...they are simply not thinking of the God of the Bible. This means sin and offending Him becomes a big deal again. This means worshiping Him makes sense again. The church needs this. And to the degree that the Calvinistic resurgence has helped to recover this I applaud that. R.C. Sproul's book The Holiness of God is an excellent book in that regard.

However, in the end I think the Calvinistic God is still too small. I do find it ironic that in Piper's presentation explaining the importance of this recovery of the wonder of God, he is primarily quoting from A.W. Tozer ... a Non-Calvinist.

I'll finish this post with a Tozer quote

“GOD SOVEREIGNLY DECREED THAT MAN SHOULD BE FREE TO EXERCISE MORAL CHOICE, AND MAN FROM THE BEGINNING HAS FULFILLED THAT DECREE BY MAKING HIS CHOICE BETWEEN GOOD AND EVIL. WHEN HE CHOOSES TO DO EVIL, HE DOES NOT THEREBY COUNTERVAIL THE SOVEREIGN WILL OF GOD BUT FULFILLS IT, INASMUCH AS THE ETERNAL DECREE DECIDED NOT WHICH CHOICE THE MAN SHOULD MAKE BUT THAT HE SHOULD BE FREE TO MAKE IT. IF IN HIS ABSOLUTE FREEDOM GOD HAS WILLED TO GIVE MAN LIMITED FREEDOM, WHO IS THERE TO STAY HIS HAND OR SAY, ‘WHAT DOEST THOU?’ MAN’S WILL IS FREE BECAUSE GOD IS SOVEREIGN. A GOD LESS THAN SOVEREIGN COULD NOT BESTOW MORAL FREEDOM UPON HIS CREATURES. HE WOULD BE AFRAID TO DO SO.” 

– A.W. TOZER

 THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE HOLY: THE ATTRIBUTES OF GOD

Setting the Stage ...

This blog is for the purpose of explaining my Soteriological journey. Thus, it's for people who are interested in theology and can't help but find these ideas practical. I once was a Calvinist and now... am not. To clarify up front, this is not purely an emotional journey or about life experiences although those obviously play some part. However, if I remained convinced the scriptures taught Calvinism, I would remain one. Ultimately the question is whether or not the scriptures teach such a doctrine. For many approaching the issue, they are persuaded in their minds the Bible teaches it but are reluctant in their hearts to embrace it. In the end, it actually became the opposite for me. I felt I would need to silence my mind in order to continue embracing such a system.

Shall we begin? Many of us who grew up in a Christian culture inherited a theological atmosphere that was perhaps distinctive for ... not being all that distinctive. All I mean to say is that doctrine itself was ultimately not primary, at least anything but the "fundamentals", but certainly not the hard questions. It is notoriously hard to broadly categorize an entire age but nonetheless there are certain characteristics of any age. So, I don't mean to say there were no exceptions. I am generalizing. That generalization also was prone to weaknesses in it's view of Salvation and it's view of God. There are different ways of putting it but essentially the end is all the same, namely; Pop-Evangelicalism, Mambi-Pambi, Chicken soup Christianity, Joel Osteen-ish, easy believism. The seriousness of sin and the gravity of the reality of God has weighed lightly upon the Church that most of us grew up with. In the words of the prophet Jeremiah they have healed the wounds of the people lightly.

I recently heard a theologian parallel the the Calvinistic resurgence with the current political situation. In other words, the Pop-Evangelicalism or Christianity Light many of us have come from, is Hillary. However, the stringent Calvinism that has swept evangelicalism by storm is Donald Trump. I like the analogy because I think it accurately parallel's the unhealthy pendulum swing that has taken place. I also think it exposes some of the rationale in regards to why it has taken place.

Let me end this first post with a few reasons I think the weakness of Pop-Evangelicalism paved the way for the Calvinistic resurgence ...

(1) Reluctance to teach doctrine ... the mind is made to question and seek answers. If you don't give them answers then someone else will. Calvinism gives people all the answers.

(2) Pop-Evangelicalism largely had too low a view of God. This is a serious weakness. The Calvinistic resurgence has attempted to revive a BIG view of God. This is a good thing (more on this in a later post).

(3) Historical Ignorance ... Calvinists like to paint a picture of one Christian after another passing the Calvinistic baton and thus it should be seen as the historically orthodox position. In my opinion this is cherry picking and Calvinists are on the wrong side of history. More on this later...

(4) Weak Opponents. I think this is actually the biggest reason. I think of Dave Hunt and Norman Geisler for example. Both men were primarily philosophers and only secondarily theologians and exegetes. Neither man evinced an actual understanding of reformed theology. When people are seeking truth and one side avoids tough passages and doesn't seem to really understand the opponent it is only natural to think they are in error. James White has said that many people told him Geisler's book Chosen But Free made them a Calvinist. I believe that. What I think is unfortunate is that these people should never have been involved in such a debate and only hurt the cause. I also think it's unfortunate that many are not aware of all the options. They feel bound to be slaves of the word and believe what it says and think that is simply the only way to seriously deal with the text. It is that I will attempt to show is not true. Real scholars do actually read Romans 9, comment on it, and are not Calvinists. Odd ...right?

Intro

Why Paleo-Orthodoxy? First, I did not invent the term although I wish I had. It originates primarily from Methodist theologian Thomas C. Oden (For a great review article on Oden's biography refer to the link below). To the chagrin of all my college professors I turn to the trusty wikipedia for a definition ...

is a Protestant Christian theological movement of the late 20th and early 21st centuries which focuses on the consensual understanding of the faith among the Ecumenical councils and Church Fathers. While it understands this consensus of the church fathers as orthodoxy proper, it calls itself paleo-orthodoxy to distinguish itself from neo-orthodoxy, a movement that was influential among Protestant churches in the mid-20th century.^[1]" 


I had a bit of an internal debate whether or not I should use the term. I ended up deciding in favor of it because I thought it communicated more good than bad. I think it has more strengths even amidst obvious weaknesses. Essentially, it aims to go back to the fathers. The wikipedia definition shows it's contrast to neo-orthodoxy but my aim is it's contrast to reformation theology. Why? For the simple reason that I disagree with what is commonly referred to as reformed theology (I think reformation teaching is much broader in reality) and it's view of salvation. This blog is dedicated to explaining why that is. 

Protestant Christians have long debated issues regarding predestination. However, for many it seems like a new debate because of the Neo-Calvinism that has take evangelicalism on both sides of the Atlantic by storm. In 2009 Time Magazine reported it as one of the 10 ideas changing the world at the time (all articles mentioned will be linked below). Reporter Collin Hansen wrote a book about this change titled Young Restless Reformed. Yet I like many who grew up in a conservative Christian home never heard of Calvinism, nor even knew there was a debate until I was 19 years old. I still remember the car ride where my uncle articulated the acronym TULIP to me for the first time.  

Since that time I have thought a great deal about it, read many books, listened to many sermons and have perhaps had a few too many impassioned discussions trying to sort it all out. For the most part over the last 10 years or more I did believe it and tried to persuade others to believe it as well. It was my impression that if one was to take the Bible seriously one has no choice but to believe it. But for my former self, and many others who continue to espouse the position, it's more than that. In their minds Calvinism is seen as strong, conservative, healthy, powerful, vibrant and everything else is seen as weak, shallow, small, insipid, banal, cheap and just lacking ... something.

Are they correct? Why is it so popular now and where in the world did all these Calvinists come from anyway? Well, to the first question this blogger says no and the following posts will seek to establish why that is. To the latter, that is a question Calvinist pastor of Capitol Hills Baptist Church in Washington, D.C. seeks to answer (link below). I find myself in basic agreement with his musings. However, I also think he misses some important ones and later posts will establish some of my own. I look forward to taking the journey with whoever reads along with me. 

I will now provide a table of contents of future posts

Table of Contents

I - Setting the Stage: Explaining the current scene

II - The Good Part 1: The positive aspects and necessary corrective the reformed movement has brought
III - The Good Part 2: Continuation of the former
IV - Historical Analysis Part 1: It will be demonstrated that the early church father rejected deterministic thinking and that no one interpreted the Bible in such a manner until Augustine. 
V - Historical Analysis Part 2: In light of that, I will offer my thoughts on why the teaching has seemingly had such traction throughout the ages while providing a brief historical survey. 
VI - John Darwin: This post will be the necessary preparation for engaging the issue by demonstrating how Calvinists argue like Evolutionists in approach as well as their authoritarian manner. Pressing them on key issues and understanding context defeats Calvinism just the same way it does evolutionary ideology. 
VII - Exegesis of John 6, 10, 17
VIII - Exegesis of Acts 13:48, 16:14
IX - Exegesis of Romans 8
X - Exegesis of Romans 9
XI- Exegesis of Ephesians 1
XII- Other Miscellaneous Passages
XIII- Practical Implications Part 1
XIV - Practical Implications Part 2
XV - Why a Calvinist cannot have assurance: It will be demonstrated how this doctrine has often robbed people of assurance and also how unless the implications are ignored and brushed aside, objectively the Calvinist can never have assurance. 


Links

(1) Book Review on Oden - Carl Trueman review 
(2) Time Magazine Article -  TIME
(3) Young Restless Reformed Article - Restless
(4) Mark Dever - Dever