GRPL Ping
Seems even more true today.
GRPL Ping
Seems even more true today.
Having researched this in the past — and I am not a Calvinist — the Calvinists were far and away the largest group of founding fathers. Anglicans of the day were also largely out of the cromwell Calvinist influence, iirc.
I’m a Methodist Only one or two of the founders were Methodist. Mitigating that, of course, is that Methodism was brand new in America at that time.
Hoss
A few years ago, I inserted the significance of the Reformation, and Calvin, and Geneva into a conversation here about the Founding and received a bunch of snide comments like, “where did you learn history?”. I posted links to books and articles and so on, but to no avail.
In any event. The influence on Calvin and his progeny on the founding, while true, and obvious to us, is still way under appreciated in these strangely secular times.
The fallen nature of man is Catholic orthodoxy.
Calvin’s novel doctrine or heresy wasn’t about man’s fallen nature - it was the concept of ‘Total Depravity’. This is the idea that man cannot do anything towards his salvation.
Which is simply not true. We have free will. We can choose God. That power of choice is ours alone - it is God’s gift to us. We had it before The Fall, and we retain it still.
Take away that concept - as Calvin sought to - and you get insane and inhuman concepts such as predestination and the denial of free will.
The concept of a universe full of aimless automata plunging towards a fate that they can neither choose nor reject may be a good fit for Modern America (under the increasingly tyrannical rule of the left). However it’s nothing but an insult to free men and to the Founding Fathers of America.
Excellent article. I believe one of the great failings of the church today is the fear to preach about the evil nature of man. We don’t like to see ourselves this way. And many in the church are convinced that it is just so negative that no one will listen.
Re: “By default, if one rejects Calvin’s presupposition (of the fall of man) then you are a Marxist”
This is absurd - Calvin was not the first to teach the idea of the fall of man - from Moses to the Jewish Rabbis to the NT Apostles to the early church fathers to Catholic teachings to Baptist to Lutheran to , yes, John Calvin, all believed and taught the doctrine of the fall of man.
I would agree that Calvin has taken that doctrine to an extreme view that man so totally depraved that he CANNOT respond to God’s offer of salvation unless he is predestined to do so, but he is not the first to teach that man has a fallen, sinful nature.
We don’t need to preach commentaries; we need to preach the Bible. We don’t need to preach Calvinism; we need to preach the Gospel. No, Calvinism is NOT the Gospel.
The Gospel is that...
1) Christ died
2) was buried
3) and rose again the third day
4) according to the scriptures
5) and was seen by many witnesses
so that God now commands all men everywhere to
6) repent of their sins
7) and believe in Him for salvation from sin
All of the explanations, pontifications, theological presuppositions and commentary are secondary to the message.
God has used many great preachers, both Calvinists and non-Calvinists, to proclaim the simple message which resluted in the salvation of millions.
It is hubris and heresy, plain and simple, to equate Calvinism with the Bible.