…and the resulting train wreck is there for you to read in the comments thread. Arminian Today Blog placed the ESV Study Bible video on their site and gave a plug for the Bible. Sounds safe…right?
What follows is a study in why I’m not a Calvinist anymore, and it should be funny…but it’s hard to laugh after a while. These are real people. Their mother must be so proud.
You can call it “cage phase” or “personality disorder,” but there’s something at work here that you see in a lot of theology loving believers. It’s called “totally missing the point of human conversation.”
And just in case, Charles, I won’t be posting your comments here 🙂
The Internet Monk Archives 
No fair – this was posted under “Laugh or Else” – and instead I find myself alternately weeping over the sometimes-injurious divides that still exist in the Body of Christ and rejoicing over the fact that this blog (and others like it) shows that there are those who haven’t given up hope that the Body will heal and are trying very hard to be part of the healing process. But laughing? Nope. So I guess I’m “else-ing”.
LikeLike
Excellent web pages Successes and prosperity to you!
LikeLike
Sorry, I meant Matthew 5:43-48.
LikeLike
Weekend Fisher,
I am Reformed in my theology (I will not use the “C” word, as there is too much baggage with it), because I believe that Reformed theology is most faithful to the Bible’s teaching. I am saddened and embarrassed when I hear people such as Charlie, who believe that God has no love at all for the non-elect. I have tried to reason with him on this subject, showing from Matthew 5:42-48 that God *does* clearly love the non-elect.
For my efforts, Charlie has accused me of “being closer to Amyraldianism (four-point Calvinism, which he thinks is no Calvinism at all) or Arminianism than to Calvinism.” Again, I’m a Reformed Christian– I don’t even like to use the word “Calvinist!” Charlie also throws around the term “heresy” very carelessly.
Such people are prone to a kind of theological paranoia, constantly on the hunt for even any *possible* error in a Christian’s thinking. If you don’t subscribe to their brand of hyper-Calvinism, you are either a heretic or on the very edge of heresy.
How refreshing, in comparison, is Ray Ortlund, Jr.’s loving, open-hearted Reformed theology which embraces all Christians as brothers and sisters, not only those of Reformed beliefs. He writes about his convictions on his blog, “Christ Is Deeper Still, under the entry, “Truly Reformed”– one of the best, warmest blog posts I have ever read. I tried to post a link here, but it wouldn’t work.
LikeLike
What cracks me up is that Charles’s blog is named “Reasonable Christian”.
Me-thinks Charles doesn’t understand the term “reasonable”.
LikeLike
I know a lot of Calvinists who wish their brothers (and it usually is brothers) didn’t spout like that, but most of them honestly can’t see what about Calvinism draws people like that and encourages them. I remember Piper awhile back posted a piece claiming it was the intellectual superiority of Calvinism that attracted people like that — which is a Herculean spin but completely out of touch with what God-loving scholars act like.
No, I’m convinced that it’s a certain strain of Calvinism’s obsession with God’s power / sovereignty and their belief in God’s sheer ruthlessness toward the non-elect that draws people like that and gives them a perceived license to be ruthless to the non-Calvinist.
Take care & God bless
WF
LikeLike
The Hymns of Charles Wesley and the biblical commentary of John Wesley are the main reasons why I can no longer see any reason for identifying as a Calvinist. On the other hand, the Wesleys are also one of the reasons I am beginning to wonder why I’m still a protestant. As Stanley Hauerwas said – nearly 20 years ago – “Methodists indeed are even more Catholic than the Anglicans who gave us birth since Wesley, of blessed memory, held to the Eastern fathers in a more determinative way than did any of the Western churches — Protestant or Catholic.”
And add to that the incomprehensible fact that I am – and have been for more than ten years – a Baptist.
Go figure!
LikeLike
Dan,
I follow Christ, very imperfectly. So did John Calvin, very imperfectly. I don’t embrace anything in John Calvin’s theology because of the man. I embrace what is true in his theology because I found it in the Bible before I ever read any of Calvin’s works.
I don’t like the word “Calvinist.” I don’t follow Calvin, even though I think that his basic theology is straight from the Scriptures and faithful to them. I am a Christian (follower of Christ alone) who holds to the Biblical theology of the Protestant Reformation. In that light, “Reformed Christian” is much more accurate than “Calvinist.” I wish that the term would be retired.
LikeLike
Seems this whole silly mess could be avoided if we focused on Him. Why do argue about what or who follows Calvin, or Calvin and Hobbs, or Caner or whoever. I was brought up to follow Christ. My parents “theology”, dad’s a preacher, gave rise to my understanding and disallusion. That in turn gave rise to seeking Him that they said they followed. Didn’t find Him in a church or systimatized way of thought, but in actually taking time to try and communicate directly. That led me to a church family, strangely the one I left. But without all the noise of this line of thought is better than one. Just pure unadultered Him.
LikeLike
It seems to me that many of the argumentative Calvinists of today are like the fundamental, independent Baptists of 30-40 years ago. At the time they were a growing, surging movement. But somewhere along the line, their passion for personal evangelism and holiness became sublimated to their obsession with hair length, movies, non-Christian music, and a general attack on much of modern culture. They quickly became a caricature, a declining subculture with little influence outside its own ranks.
The same thing may happen to many contemporary Calvinists if they continue their obsession with in-house debates, a constant hunt for error anywhere they find it, and a suspicion of anything that’s “non-Calvinist”. I know not all Calvinists are like this, but I have been around them enough to see this nit-picking attitude at work.
LikeLike
Well, after our *many* back-and-forth interactions, through comments on the aforementioned blog, Charlie seems to be *possibly* admitting that he *might* have been wrong in how he conversed with some of the Arminians (and other Reformed believers, such as myself) on the blog.
Michael, I think that one of the main reasons many self-proclaimed “Calvinists” come across as arrogant and mean-spirited is that they don’t truly understand and think through the practical *implications* of Calvinism for actual application in their lives… which leads me to wonder how well they even understand Calvinism, as a Biblical and systematically theological explanation of God’s ways with fallen humanity.
LikeLike
Vangelicmonk, don’t get mad, but I laughed when I read you saying you lost a girlfriend to the One True Faith – Calvinism.
I know that had to be rough and I feel for you, but wow.
LikeLike
I’ve had to repent for my militant calvinism. and when I did, I realize that my militancy had been a substitute for actual faith. in straining the gnat of biblical theology I swallowed the camel of a loud mouth.
Warfield said that Calvinism is Christianity on its knees. I’m trying.
LikeLike
Michael,
Over at the Arminian Today blog, I have introduced myself to Charlie Ray as a Reformed Baptist Christian. I have also asked him some pointed, soul-searching questions. Thus far, he has refused to answer and has questioned whether I am “really” Reformed. 🙂 I smile, but in reality, it is sad…
LikeLike
I am currently reading Roger Olson’s “The Story of Christian Theology” and his chapter on Fundamentalism. He talks about how this “reaction” was more or less “ecumenical” at first and then went off the deep end with the focus on “distinctives” that ended up severely dividing the movement and sending it to the fringe groups.
Unfortuantely, I see a lot of this in the extreme elements of Calvinism where the “fringe” elements tend to define the movement. However, at another point I see a lot of reinforcement of the fringe by the mainstream of Calvinism/Reformed Theologians by always proclaiming the destructive qualities of the “semi-pelegians” while also claiming Arminians as friends in Christ.
I tell Calvinists of this extreme nature who claim the essential nature of Calvinist soteriology to make it an essential to the point of cutting off fellowship from 70% of other Evangelicals. If you have the ulitimate “truth” of the perfect perspecuity of Scripture on this item, then make yourself the true body of Christ.
p.s. I lost a relationship over this issue. My g/f became a Calvinist and all we did was fight about this issue while she sought to convert all our Christian freinds to her new found revelation. Sad but true.
LikeLike
Oh. My. Word. Somebody introduce Charles to the joys of decaf.
LikeLike
Sorry, just realized that my comment added nothing whatsoever to the discussion. Just typed and pressed submit before giving it any thought.
LikeLike
Hey, I learned a new word today “Arminian”. Well, I’ll be. Can’t really keep track of the old big name denominations let alone the offshoots and their doctrines. Makes my brain hurt.
LikeLike
Fr. Ernesto, somehow I doubt that a guy demonstrating an almost total absence of sapience and with such a shallow affect would make for “the best” kind of pastor. I don’t know about you, but I prefer my moral and spiritual leaders to have at least a basic grasp of what human beings are and how they understand things.
LikeLike
It’s par for the course. There are a lot of kooks, quacks, and the full range of assorted nuts out there. They’re in every church, and they have an internet connection.
LikeLike
One quick follow-up. Some of you were wondering about Charles and speculating about him. So, I simply clicked on his name in the original blog and he has allowed his profile to be public. He has an M.Div. degree and is a pastor at a church. Sometimes, the simplest solutions are the best.
LikeLike
My gut reaction to reading/skimming through that whole exchange was to whip off a satirical tirade that made use of Desert Storm and a new twist on “shock and awe”. But as I read on Adrian Warnock’s blog, it would be better to go get a cup of coffee and let the Holy Spirit call you back from the brink. So . . .
What I came away with is how careful those of us who have recently discovered R.C. Sproul, Charles Spurgeon, and Clvn need to be about not letting knowledge puff up, or make us contentious and offensive. As others have said, the doctrines of total depravity and election should have a humbling effect. Evangelicals can so easily be offensive when “witnessing” to outsiders, Calvinists can be so obnoxious when “witnessing” to insiders… I’m more and more thankful that our Lord is gracious to us, even when we’re not.
Spurgeon’s “Morning and Evening” for today is an encouraging and comforting reminder of how an Almighty, Sovereign God is the one who will ultimately bring us to perfection and fulfill the real desire of our hearts – to be pleasing to him.
Editorial note: in the churches I grew up in, “Clvn” was almost a four-letter word…
LikeLike
Hello Michael
Thanks for your thoughtful response to my post. I think you’re on to something with your distinction between Calvinism and Reformed thinking. As far as I can tell there are at least three strains of Calvinist/Reformed thinking in North America: Contenental Kyperism, Puritanism and a kind of Scottish Presbyterianism that seem to be rooted in the commonsense philosophical tradition. They all have virtues and vices and any case I don’t really have the time or expertise to discuss their fine points here. I will say however that the kind of inflamed Hyper Calvinism that our friend Charles demonstrated is an almost purely internet phenomena. I have never heard any thing like this from a reformed pulpit and very rarely from the pew. I would hate to think that a disillusioned main stream evangelical would shy away from visiting your average PCA or CRC church for fear of running into Charles and his kin. The fact is they are mercifully rare on the ground.
That being said there are some very real problems with main stream evangelical reformed thinking. You are right to call attention to the way that the Complementation tail is waging the Trinitarian Dog in some circles. And although I don’t think you have talked about it on your site I am convinced that the growing influence of Van Till’s Presupposition apologetics and epistemology will do lasting damage to the cause of Christ inside and outside the academy.
I guess what I really want to say is that your best when you are punching above your weight. Leave the small fry like Charles alone (he isn’t listening to you anyway- I am not sure he listens to anyone) and concentrate your fire on the Big Game (the John Pipers, Al Molers and Mark Driscoll of the world*)
God Bless
Steve in Toronto
* These are all fine Christian Men but in different ways there Theology/messages have become unbalanced
LikeLike
I am not smart enough to be a Calvinist.
But I do see the dichotomy that is referenced on this blog. The Calvinist doctrine should produce people who are the humblest and most graceful, deeply thankful for God’s unmerited favor. Incidentally, the doctrine does indeed produce such people but they don’t bluster much in public and they don’t fill up blog comments.
Unfortunately Calvinists are also arrogant argumentative lawyers who function without a shred of compassion, perpetually angry and looking for a fight. They seem to have fallen for the power of the logic and forgotten the broken savior and loving God that makes it possible.
Personally I think the problem is a human condition, not a Calvinist one.
LikeLike
After reading about 10 of the posts in response to the link I had to quit.
I wonder if Calvinists are going to become ESV only believers now.
LikeLike
Clarification to JonXlin: I did not mean to say that Calvinism attracts those of strong intellect, or that they are smarter than those in other traditions. My intent was to say that Calvinism tends to attract those who take an INTELLECTUAL APPROACH to the Bible and theology, who take the analytical tack, who enjoy the competitive thrill of the argument, who approach these matters like Scribes and Pharisees–in other words, lawyers.
We need these kinds of people in the Body of Christ. Their gifts are often profound. However, strengths may be misused and tear down rather than edify.
LikeLike
DaveD,
You are exactly right on the money. We’ve learned nothing in the last 400 years this argument has been boiling, let alone the 1950 years since Paul penned these words. I won’t discuss this anymore nor do I nor will I ever use the C or A words. I was raised in the Christian & Missionary Alliance and had by the age of 3 memorized both John 3:16 and the little song “Jesus Loves Me.” After Bible college and the pastorate, that is as far as my theology now takes me. In my work in Cambodia, that is all I need.
LikeLike
I want to reply to my good friend Steve in Toronto.
>I think your “front paging†nuts like ‘Charles’ is a bad idea. You are in danger of creating an unfair image of Calvinists as a bunch of raving loons.
I rise to my own defense! (Point well taken, and I have given it serious thought.)
1. I don’t believe “Calvinist” is a label that automatically drags in everyone who is reformed. I know that sounds a bit lame, but clearly Charles isn’t representing any church or denom. He’s a one man show.
And he’s not a loon. He’s a bright boy doing an imitation of a reformed apologist I could name.
So I want to plead innocent on implicating the PCA, etc. They have their own loons, as do Baptists, Lifeway, Charismatics, Catholics, etc. I do cover evangelicalism. 🙂
2. Calvinists aren’t going to be defined by me putting out one example of a guy with a personality disorder. The issue that will be raised will be “How much does a guy with a personality disorder define me as a Calvinist? (If I am one.)
3. When I publicly renounced Calvinism, I made it plain that I wasn’t moving out of the house because of the house or everyone in it, but because of how certain people in the house were viewed by others.
I could cite specific examples, but I’ll be general. I think that high profile reformed voices have to speak to what is going on there with Charles. Several have. More need to. But the fact is that we still have reformed blogs visited by many readers of this comment who have Ken Silva on their blogroll. Why? Because he performs a “service” that many other reformed people want done, but don’t want to do.
4. Back when I wrote in protest of a reformed pundit Paul Proctor calling the death of emerging pastor Kyle Lake a judgement from God on the emerging church, I learned that people like Proctor will be protected as Calvinists before they will be called out as embarrassments and detriments. This continues to happen, even with some moderated comments on this thread.
That’s why the discussion needs to happen. There ARE so many Calvinists who don’t follow Charles, but those who do seem to have a magnified influence because it goes largely unanswered.
peace
MS
LikeLike
To all Calvinists: You may not like it, but many people have encountered someone like Charlie and been left wondering why the Calvinists are so angry. If Charlie doesn’t represent you, get on the Arminian Today Blog and say so.
LikeLike
I think I remember Mike Horton saying (sarcastically) something to the affect of: it is only the Calvinists who can be proud of Total Depravity.
LikeLike
4 For while one saith, I am of (Calvin); and another, I am of (Arminius); are ye not carnal?
5 Who then is Calvin, and who is Arminius, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man? 6 I have planted, Arminius watered; but God gave the increase. 7 So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase.
1 Cor 3:4-7 (KJV)
11 For it has been reported to me by Chloe’s people that there is quarreling among you, my brothers. 12 What I mean is that each one of you says, “I follow Calvin,†or “I follow Arminius,†or “I follow Cephas,†or “I follow Christ.†13 Is Christ divided? Was Calvin crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Arminius?
1 Cor 1:11-13 (ESV)
Folks like this are the reason I don’t like discussing theology sometimes. And yes, protests to the contrary notwithstanding, it does seem to be a common trait of Calvinists. I don’t know where the idea developed that you have to believe EXACTLY like they do or your not saved but I get really tired of hearing it.
I won’t even go into the logical problems with God: Micromanager. 🙂
DD
LikeLike
Why do people keep saying that ue that Calvinism attracts people of strong intellect?
It’s about as silly as making the argument that atheism attracts people of strong intellect. That may be true, but it also attracts those of not so strong intellect. It also conveys false assumptions about the people in the other camp.
Not trying to start a flame war or anything, but coming from the standpoint of the Stone-Campbell movement I’ve heard the exact opposite. I don’t think it’s because Stone-Campbell people are smarter or not as smart as Calvinists. I think it’s because people typecast people and ideas from the other movement.
LikeLike
I am not a Calvinist. One reasons is that my observation of many Calvinists is that they not only believe they are predestined as one of the Elect, but also often act as if they are predestined to be right.
The first, correctly interpreted, is an occasion for the deepest of humility on the part of any human. The second is the occasion for the most offensive of spiritual arrogance.
LikeLike
Is this the product of “self-feeding”? Leave the kids to choose their own menus, and is it any wonder if they choose chocolate cake everytime? Theology-bashing is kid’s stuff (my bobble-head can beat up your bobble-head). I absolutely agree that this is a Spiritual formation issue, where everyone chooses a spiritual form that is right in their own eyes. I am not surprised why people like these get plugged into teaching positions, especially with most spiritual gift assessments being a narcissistic self-evaluation, and churches typically being desparate for warm bodies to stick in front of Sunday school classes.
I think Charles really thinks he is spiritually advanced, because in a world of self-feeding spirituality, he has nothing to compare himself to, except self-induced illusions. I think I know, because I have been Charles more times than I can count.
Discipleship and spiritual mentoring: amen, amen, amen. Start as early as possible, showing kids what it means to be a Christian, rather than just filling their heads with data.
LikeLike
As to your question on what it is in Calvinism that produces and rewards people like Charles, my take on it is that it is not Calvinism so much as it is basic human nature. Calvinism appeals for the most part to those of strong intellect, who have the distinct challenge of not allowing their intellect to fill them up with false notions of superiority to other people. Put these people in a system where knowledge is rewarded, and you’re asking for trouble.
Since my experience and knowledge of Calvinism is limited, that is as far as I will go.
LikeLike
Wow. I can only hope to one day have that kind of train wreck in the comment threads of my blog!!!
LikeLike
iMonk: There’s a place there in mentoring somewhere that needs some more assertiveness. This kind of behavior is wrong. It really should be a matter for church discipline if it continues without being tempered.
I agree whole-heartedly. However, there’s a key flaw, in that this assumes that those in a place of mentoring or those in a position to execute church discipline don’t have the same problem. After all, where does the crabby Calvinist get his warped perspective from? Is it not from the leaders that he worships?
Unfortunately, Charles (or one of his friends) will most likely be the pastor of his church in 15 years, replacing the guy from whom Charles got his viewpoints. And the vicious cycle continues.
The problem that we calm Calvinists have in trying to get other Calvinists to chill is that most of them argue that if we won’t go to the mat for Calvinism, then we’re not really Calvinists. And seeing as how the crabby Calvinists only listen to those who they deem to be Calvinists, that becomes a nearly inpenetrable circle.
LikeLike
jsaras said…
“I consider both the RCC and the Pentecostals to be hereticalâ€
I read that as “Everybody’s a Heretic except MEEEEEE!”
The ultimate theoretical end stage of Protestantism: Millions of Only True Churches, each with only one member, each denouncing all the others as heretics.
LikeLike
Hello Michael
As you know I am a big fan of your site and regard you as a kindred sprite but I think your “front paging†nuts like ‘Charles’ is a bad idea. You are in danger of creating an unfair image of Calvinist as a bunch of raving loons. I no longer describe my self as a Reformed but I have spent over half my life in reformed churches and they are full of wonderful God fearing christians (a special hat tip to Peter Moore formally at Toronto’s Little Trinity (now at Trinity Episcopal School for Ministry) and Scotty Smith at Nashville’s Christ Community). Every Christian community throws up is share of whack jobs (I have a friend who went to the Charismatic Catholic Franciscan University in Steubenville who makes Charles look like a model of charitable ecumenism). Lets not lose site of the wonderful insights into the Gospel that come from the Reformed Tradition it’s far to easy for us ex-Calvinist to amplify the traditions failing. The fact is that although I now worship at an Anglican Church its hard to avoid the conclusion that taken as a whole the PCA is the most well healthy well rounded and consistently biblical of any major denomination in North America I am convinced that this is because of the many virtues of their reformed heritage.
God Bless
Steve in Toronto
LikeLike
I had to stop reading at this point in the discusssion:
“Well, Charlie boy, if you find out that Calvinism is NOT the gospel, then you have believed in a lie, and will spend eternity in hell. Are you prepared for that? Hope so.”
Wow. Nothing like telling somebody their views could send them straight to hell, all the while crying foul that someone like Charles dare show contempt for their own views or be honest enough to say he believes certain sects to be heretical. No Calvinist believes that it is doctrine that saves a person, no matter how important they think doctrine is.
But for the record, this guy was the equivalent of a theological cage-fighter in that discussion. I am a calvinist and have know only a couple who acted like this, and trust me….. guys like this don’t usually last long. They either get burnt out by fighting windmills and eventually reprioritize their faithSometimes we can get puffed up by knowledge but Grace will eventually humble a person.
To be honest; I can see parallels of this type of behavior in almost all christian circles though; Catholics who actually believe Protestants are of a lower status, charismatics who believe non-charismatics are living out a marginal faith, emergent-types who sanctimoniously look down upon mainline expressions of faith, the fundamentalist baptist whose sermons are a rotation of rants against particular “sins” or social ills, liberals who look down on evangelicals because they believe in more than a social gospel, evangelicals who condemn those who don’t share the same narrow political view or militant fervor……. the list goes on and on of people who can’t proverbially see the forest for the all the trees.
I hope you don’t moderate this post away Micheal.
LikeLike
Does anyone wish to argue as to whether priest must have beards or not? And, may the beards be trimmed short or do they have to be allowed to grow long? Sadly, there are people who argue that within Eastern Orthodoxy. Fortunately, not many. Nevertheless, I share this tidbit under the idea that “misery loves company.”
Following up on that, our Church is very old. How old is it? It is so old that we no longer do full theological arguments, we just cite a keyword or two that reminds everyone of the argument, or counter-argument, in question. It saves a lot of time and lets us get back to what we are supposed to do. 🙂
LikeLike
As Chaplain Mike said:
Wow.
Makes me tired. Reminds me of the election (the political one). The verse that comes to mind is:
this one, second sentence…
LikeLike
Mike: … I think Calvinism can breed arrogance because the theological perspective tends to disregard emotional and “close to home” issues …
Which, in one sense, explains a lot. I was part of a group at my church that embraced Calvinism all within a few months of each other. The guy that introduced us to it already was an emotional (but not overly-so) guy. His emotions didn’t go away when he became a Calvinist, nor did he pick up any arrogance. So imagine my surprise when I started to run into Calvinists who are arrogant automatons.
On the flip side, it’s ludicrous that Calvinism would drain someone of emotions (I’m not saying that you’re ludicrous, Mike — just that you are observing and commenting on a ludicrous situation). Just as I said before that Calvinism should lead to further humility, not arrogance, the same goes for emotion. The greater that you realize how great God is and how much we suck, the more you should be passionately in love with Him. (And I’m not saying that you have to be Calvinist to get a proper perspective on this stuff — but that perspective is a very basic tenet of Calvinism.)
Here’s the kicker: Mike mentions miscarriages as one of the “close to home” issues. One of our group miscarried her first child two days before she was due. She and her husband took great solace in their new-found understanding of God’s sovereignty, while several of their Armenian friends were telling them (what boiled down to) “excrement happens”.
So while Mike’s analysis is correct that Calvinism can lead to arrogance and non-emotion, it doesn’t have to — and I would argue, can’t logically do so, if one is honest about his/her Calvinism.
LikeLike
I think that guy in the video attends my book club. 😉
LikeLike
Amen, Pat. Amen.
LikeLike
Scott, I stand corrected. My apologies and relief. My (mis)understanding stemmed from the fact that you started with “Now I know why…”; that certainly sounds like a support of Caner’s statement.
Maybe no one who has commented on this post needed to hear it, but the simple existence of Caner does prove that there are people out there with, shall we say, incomplete analyses of Calvinism.
LikeLike
Pat, in the main, I tend to think that people (not Jesus) tend to prefer wielding hellfire arguments to helping out, because saying Things Of Profound Importance (and knowing you’ll be ignored because you’re right) is one of the most delicious consolations religious people take advantage of. It feels nice to lose yourself in some miasmic old-time language, to wield the words of learned men and fiery prophets blithely and remain innocent; if you master the imitation, you feel like you’re one of them, part of their tradition, a spiritual Knight of God’s, not a student, not an awkward amateur. The theology, Bible citations, the pious language don’t seem to me to be anything more than a costume, so trivial people can walk around feeling like Jeremiah. In the main, I think this IS Christianity in the suburb: we’re bored. Get a roomful of the Good Guys, and sooner or later they’ll declare one of their own a Bad Guy just to have someone to practice Christianity against.
LikeLike
The post doesn’t seem to make a case for Calvinism so much as it makes a case for much stricter comment moderation on the part of the blogger.
Here’s the illogical bit: Those who believe in election insist, nevertheless, in trying to convince someone by argument that they’re wrong and should repent. They may believe in monergism, but certainly don’t practice it.
But to be fair, sometimes we Arminians are just as obnoxious in the defense of our system. I see it a lot less, but I certainly do see it.
LikeLike
Preach it Pat!!!
Steve Scott said: The fact that the most arrogant people in the world are Calvinists proves Calvinism’s truthfulness.
Aliasmoi said: Case in point….. 😉
Lionel said: … Just ask the Anabaptist….
Aliasmoi said: Excuse me???
What the heck is an Arminian?
LikeLike
I think it’s an important question of spiritual formation. SBCers need to ask it about excessive zeal for evangelism, RCs have their argumentative apologists that concentrate on converting Protestants, political types have their zealots.
There’s a place there in mentoring somewhere that needs some more assertiveness. This kind of behavior is wrong. It really should be a matter for church discipline if it continues without being tempered.
All of us can be like this, but we don’t have to create a system that has Charles teaching Sunday School as a reward for his knowledge.
BTW, I think the blogger in the first part of this video has a good idea of this sort of personality. (About 1 minute in)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9pPZs4aTcU
LikeLike
It strikes me that many of our doctrinal hellfire and brimstone diatribes seem to go away when instead of writing hours of comments, we put on our jackets, head out the door and go serve the poor, listening to their story and finding the core of the heart of God.
LikeLike
Michael asks: “Are you aware of what it is in your tradition of spirituality that produces ‘Charles’ in all his arrogant, rude, presumptuous glory?”
As a matter of fact, I do. Knowledge puffs up. The higher the knowledge, the more puffing up. The fact that the most arrogant people in the world are Calvinists proves Calvinism’s truthfulness. hehehe 🙂
LikeLike
To address your question more directly, iMonk, I think Calvinism can breed arrogance because the theological perspective tends to disregard emotional and “close to home” issues (miscarriages, mentally-handicapped siblings, “those who have never heard,” etc.) and so it is easy for Calvinists to say “I don’t get caught up in emotion, I just let God be God” and similar kinds of things. And we become arrogant because we give God more credit than Arminians do, by our way of thinking. I’m not saying it makes sense!
This also ties into what I said before about humility and time – how many of us have faced real emotional challenges to our faith, such as our firstborn being a miscarriage, by the time we get through Sunday School and into Christian college? How often is it after college that the real world forces its way into our lives and forces us to admit that things are not as simple as we thought they were? I’m still a Calvinist, of a sort, but I’ve had to think in real life terms, not just “theological” terms, about what I believe, and that, admittedly, is a real challenge to being what most people mean today when they say “Calvinist.”
LikeLike
I went to a predominantly Calvinist College and a predominantly Calvinist Seminary and one of the main things I noticed is that there was a lot more arrogance at the college (among students) than at the seminary. I remember hearing a preacher while at the college say “I believe a great many things less firmly than I did while in bible college” and I thought, at the time, that he was crazy – you’re supposed to believe everything MORE strongly as you go on, right? But now I realize that he was absolutely right – not in the sense that I am less convinced that Jesus is my Savior than I was five years ago when I finished college, but by learning MORE I am now absolutely convinced of fewer things. I think that the arrogance found in Charles’ comments stems not simply from being a calvinist, but from being a Calvinist who has stopped learning. I saw arrogant college-level calvinists (such as myself) become humbled by calvinist seminary professors who, because they kept on learning, are aware of their own intellectual limitations.
This is not to say that college grads are arrogant, and seminary grads aren’t! My point is that true learning is evidenced by humility, and this simply takes time.
LikeLike
Looking at Charles’s profile, he’s an Anglican, and I’m half Scottish. Already, I’m painting my face blue.
Last year I read Mark Twain’s book _Roughing It_. It is a great sampling of Twain, and it includes such gems as Appendix C. Look it up on Google Books, and read just that one section (though I highly commend Chapter XLVII to you as a study in high-falootin’, schooldumacated God-talk vs. miners’ vernacular… classic!). Calvinists like Charles just shoot from the hip and get really nasty when they miss and somebody is able to fire back. It’s that bookish, socially maladjusted quality that comes from too much time alone in the library when he should have gone out to spend time with other people, date girls, etc.
Calvin himself starts the _Institutes_ by treating knowledge. I don’t think the leap is too large from aspiring to gain knowledge about God and man to saying, “I know more than you do.”
I love reading Calvin, and I love most of my contemporaries who are associated with his legacy. For the most part, I have found them to be humble and kind, good neighbors, and loyal friends. But I hate talking with this particular brand of Calvinist. They just come across like Conrad Wiegand (_Roughing It_, Appendix C).
LikeLike
Then there are those caught in between. The Calminians like me. Our favourite verse:
2 Peter 3:17 – Therefore, dear friends, since you already know this, be on your guard so that you may not be carried away by the error of lawless men and fall from your secure position. 🙂
LikeLike
Somehow, I sense the need for a lot more sermons based on 1 Cor 8:2.
LikeLike
Absolute best part of that? The guy’s blog title: “Reasonable Christian” 😀
LikeLike
I suspect that the presence of such rudeness comes less from Calvinism as such as from the modernism/fundamentalism disputes in which most of the conservative Reformed denominations were born. John Frame has a good article, “Machen’s Warrior Children”, found at http://www.frame-poythress.org/frame_articles/2003Machen.htm, which details some of the internecine conflicts between Calvinists during the last 80 years or so. Frame’s observations at the end are worth reading, even if you don’t want to read the whole article. I suspect that the birth of the OPC, PCA, RPC, etc., in (mostly justified) conflict concerning what is and is not the gospel led to a mindset where almost any doctrinal dissent could be seen as threatening to the heart of the gospel.
A second, more recent, source of this sort of arrogance may come from the “Christian Worldview” stream of thought associated with Francis Schaeffer. I find this sadly ironic, because it would seem that this sort of behavior was one of the postures that Schaeffer was trying to avoid. Unfortunately, the (correct) idea that Christianity is relevant to every area of life all too easily becomes the (incorrect) idea that no dissent is possible on any topic without denying the gospel.
The pastoral question is more difficult; the suggestion I have in preaching (even though I’m not a pastor) is to be clear that there is no such thing as justification by theology, and to occasionally put the spotlight on Jesus’ interaction with the Pharisees. An encouragement to read theologians from other Christian traditions could go a long way, as well as a challenge to serve the local church in a way that doesn’t involve the exercise of “teaching gifts”.
LikeLike
Michael,
How about Colossians 3, Ephesians 4-5, Romans 13-14, 1 Corinthians 1, Galatians 5, ….. The New Testament.
I uphold Calvinistic Soteriology with no shame; however, with just a little reading of Church history we will see that their soteriology and doctrine never, ever brought them to the submission of the Lord Jesus. Just ask the Anabaptist. But I will stop there before I go into a rant.
Truth be told in Calvinism doctrine is more important than practice which as far as I can tell in the New Testament is an oxymoron. More time is spent debating, instead of loving, philosophizing instead of serving, and reading instead of walking it out. Big Conferences are going on in the Christian church trying to disprove one another while the world goes to hell in a hand basket (yes I know I believe in Divine Election).
I appreciate your critical views, hopefully more of us who uphold the 5 points will begin to see the dying world and get at it instead of boasting on all of the past evangelistic “calvinist” who have been dead for 200 years. Much love Micheal. I enjoy the CCA, I am a passive listener and blog observer.
LikeLike
Brendt Waters,
You said,
“I realize that the lunacy that Charles presents is (unfortunately) prevalent in Calvinist circles, but it is not inherent. I also realize that Michael knows this. But when Caner — who is simply the other side of the same asinine coin — gets quoted in the comments, it’s obvious that not everyone here does.”
You sure read alot into one simple comment. He was quoted because the fact of the matter is that Charles and his type of Calvinist friends fuel the fires of people like Caner who is equally vehement in his anti-Calvinist rants. That’s all. What was “obvious” to you really was not true.
LikeLike
(Doh! That would be “than I was“, not “did”.)
LikeLike
Something in Calvinism rewards this kind of spirituality rather than curbing it.
Two semi-opposing thoughts:
1) I wish I knew. Anyone with any real understanding of Calvinism would see that it should yield greater humility. Ya know, that whole “total depravity” thing?
Maybe I’m just an idiot — and I’m sure that Charles could verify that — but, in some ways, I am certain of less now than I did before I embraced Calvinism.
2) On the flipside, is it really Calvinism that produces such arrogance and team politics? If so, then how do we explain people like Caner?
LikeLike
Calvinistic and Reformed theology has always been the most intellectually stimulating and satisfying of theological traditions. In my experience I have found it often attracts “Scribe and Pharisee” temperament types. These lawyerly personalities believe that winning an argument is nirvana. We all have our own points of pride, but intellectual superiority seems to be the one for the TULIPS among us.
LikeLike
That’s a great question. I think it’s perhaps immaturity. Not unlike a brand new Christian (of unknown theological bent) who is so excited about what they have learned about the gospel, that they will use ever tactic, many times obnoxious ones, to share the truth they have found and are so passionate about. I have been guilty of being a “Charles” when I found Calvinism after growing up in Arminianism. What I have learned at my church is that Calvinists have the greatest reason NOT to behave like Charles or BE like Charles. If every part of our being is depraved and we have been saved through no act of our own, we have NOTHING of which to boast, much less the grace we understand has been given to us for no reason we know of other than God was pleased to do it. Somehow, though, it’s tempting to think we have found a treasure non-Calvinists are not privvy too, and so we get obnoxious. Somehow being “chosen” is a reason to boast bc we “forget” we weren’t chosen for reasons of our own deserving. This is stream of consciousness. Thanks for the challenge and it is something I’m aware of and having to temper and remember grace.
LikeLike
Without any disrespect to my Calvinist brothers and sisters, I want to ask one question:
Are you aware of what it is in your tradition of spirituality that produces “Charles” in all his arrogant, rude, presumptuous glory? Something in Calvinism rewards this kind of spirituality rather than curbing it. This is why so many Calvinists would NEVER act like this, but what is the consensus on what to do with Charles? In my experience, it was to let him continue in his path, encourage his theological debating and temper his extreme comments with just a touch of caution. Some Calvinistic leaders will speak louder, but Calvinism is full of guys like Charles.
Something is amiss in local churches that are producing and rewarding this kind of individual.
LikeLike
I’ve sent a message to Brian Evans (as in http://www.xanga.com/pilgrimsjourney7419, duh). He will settle this for all of us I’m sure.
LikeLike
“Granted, it is not what the RC church teaches at large to it members, but the truth will prevail.”
*sigh*
Which is exactly why the bloke in the big white hat living in Rome has all the bishops over for the Synod discussing the Word of God in the life and mission of the Church right this minute. They’re even reading the whole Bible through (from Genesis to Revelation) on Italian state television while they’re at it.
I have to admit, I was amused by the charges made by at least one of the comments that the Arminian in question was interpreting the Scriptures incorrectly (while he, as a Calvinist, OF COURSE had the absolute correct interpretation).
Yes, indeed: nobody’s infallible – except me. 🙂
LikeLike
Donald Miller once said that he tries “to be a Christian without being [a defecatory orifice].” Substitute “Calvinist” for “Christian” and the statement is applicable to me.
I realize that the lunacy that Charles presents is (unfortunately) prevalent in Calvinist circles, but it is not inherent. I also realize that Michael knows this. But when Caner — who is simply the other side of the same asinine coin — gets quoted in the comments, it’s obvious that not everyone here does.
I also realize that lunacy such as Charles’ is not the sole reason that Michael is not a Calvinist anymore. But it is a hindrance; might one be so bold (and seminary-ish) to call it “a stumbling block”?
Not that I’m saying that Michael is wrong to not be Calvinist. But what in God’s name — quite literally — is the point of totally alienating someone who doesn’t believe as you do, in hopes that the alienation will make them want to move to your side?
The application to Christianity (as opposed to Calvinism) is left as an exercise for the reader.
LikeLike
Pretty wild over there. Makes the iMonk’s typical comments tame by comparison. I did note a lot of emoticons in use though.
LikeLike
Now I know why Ergun Caner said Calvinism was a mental disorder.
LikeLike
Ridiculous – I mean, seriously – why in the hell would some dude just be sitting around waiting for some other dude to adopt “his” Bible and jump on him for it??? I gotta make up a new word – I’m wackadoodled by all that.
I used to have a “favorite” comment hijacker back in the day – mostly about being too Catholic and a bunch of goofy trap-door questions. I think I’m glad those days are over.
LikeLike
I’m sorry, Michael, but this is just hilarious.
Of course, if someone hangs around with theologians all the time and takes them seriously, I suppose this sort of thing does lose its comic value. But for an outsider like me, it’s very funny indeed.
Let’s face it — these guys are having fun. And they *are* all guys, as far as I can tell — not a totally insignificant fact. They’re just playing “My [theology, in this case] is bigger than yours.”
And they’re doing it with such zest! Who’d want to end their fun? Take their “isms” away, and they might have to duke it out in a parking lot.
No offense intended to guys in general, really. Or to theologians in general. Or… oh, never mind.
LikeLike
Wow. The Charles guy was trying to win them and evangelize them. His contempt for the Arminians is obvious, and their patience with allowing him to continue to post is amazing.
Why quote Councils that no one else in the conversation would see as having value? Just talking at people without talking with them.
LikeLike
Oh. Dear.
LikeLike
That dude says he can’t for the life of him figure out why an Arminian would want an ESVSB?
Well, I want one partly because the wonderful Wesleyan-Arminian scholar John Oswalt is a contributor.
Ah-hahahahahahahaha!
LikeLike
Woo. I counted more words ending in “-ism” per line on that flamethread than I’ve ever seen before.
LikeLike
Threads like this could convince me that theology is not much more than an intellectual hamster wheel for people who’d have been better off learning a trade.
The highest virtue in Reformation theology is apparently autism.
Fav. quotes!
Charlie J. Ray said…
I’m trying to evangelize you:) But you’re still in bondage to sin. Besides, “I” can’t save ANYONE. You seem to imply that you somehow share God’s ability to save?
September 12, 2008 1:50 PM
Charlie J. Ray said…
Belligerent? I thought I was merely being graceful. After all, I am sharing the doctrines of grace:)
William Birch said…
Charles,
WRONG, but thanks for trying. Charles, if God gives a person the ABILITY to do something, then in what way whatsoever can it be accredited as man’s “work”? You’re grasping at straws here, and I don’t blame you.
Your god says that he loves the world, but he doesn’t really mean it. Your god says that he sent his son into the world to save them, but he doesn’t really mean it. Simply put: your god has no integrity.
The Seeking Disciple said…
Go pray for us instead.
September 12, 2008 5:55 PM
jsaras said…
“I consider both the RCC and the Pentecostals to be heretical”
Well, somebody has to fulfill the purpose of fueling the fires of hell !??!
In all seriousness, I was blown away about a year ago by Brennan Manning, a (former?) Catholic priest. He had a very firm grasp of the Gospel. Granted, it is not what the RC church teaches at large to it members, but the truth will prevail.
And so on, a dreary autogenerated nightmare straight out of an Albrecht Durer painting.
Somebody do me a favor and turn off the internet.
LikeLike
**hangs head low in shame**
LikeLike
Lord, have mercy! On behalf of Calvinists, I apologize to Arminians. We are one body of Christ. One eye happens to see a few degrees one way and the other eye a few degrees the other way. Who has the corner on total truth but God alone? I happen to like what I believe in Calvinism, but I humbly submit I am a flawed human as was Calvin. “They will know us by our love” indeed…
LikeLike
wow.
LikeLike