And don't you suppose that it's just as much Phelps' intention to besmirch "Calvinism," as well?
I don't even buy the use of your term "hyper-Calvinism," regardless of whether it seems you have now chosen to back off from your prior use of the term to some degree. The term "hyper-Calvinism" in itself is a complete misrepresentation of the application and meaning of Calvinism.
Calvin never taught that evangelism was useless or inappropriate. In fact failure to evangelize flies directly in the face of Christ's departing command to "go into the world and preach the Gospel...."
"All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out." John 6:37 (KJV)
Christians don't have to understand why we are told to evangelize "all that the Father giveth me," since Christ clearly states that they "shall come to me." That's what Calvin meant by his term, "Irresistable grace."
We just have to obey God and evangelize, because that is the way He has chosen to compel those who will be saved to come to the realization of that grace, to accept Christ as Lord and Savior and thereby to be saved. We are told by Him to evangelize; therefore, it is never an option for Christians not to do so.
Calvin never instructed anyone to be disobedient to Christ in this or in any other regard.
To indict Calvin by implication that he ever preached anything resembling what you have continually chosen to term, "hyper-Calvinism," is a gross misrepresentation of the man and the Biblically sound principles about which he wrote and from which he taught.
FReegards!
I have never said that Calvin never taught that evangelism was useless. The illustration of Harold Camping is yet another perversion and twisting around of Calvin. Camping is a heretic. Calvin is not. Hyper-Calvinism is indeed a complete misrepresentation, and I have not backed off from that at all. Even Pensacola Christian College, whom I don’t exactly agree with their interpretation of Fundamentalism, has described hyper-Calvinism as being in error. People have read into Calvin stuff that he never wrote, and Camping is one of them. Camping has even gone as far as telling Christians they should not bother praying for someone’s salvation, because God already knows whether or not the person is going to be saved. This was in the early 1980’s. I have examined the Calvinism vs Arminianism debate, and see it as a debate of salvation by grace versus salvation by works. It is indeed salvation by grace, since any effort by works is an exercise in futility, which St Paul eloquently describes in one of his letters, with the Holy Spirit’s guidance of course. Thus my description of Phelps claiming an extreme “off the rails” version of Calvinism which is dead wrong.
Now, is Phelps deliberately misrepresenting not only Calvinism , but Christianity as a whole? To this I would dare say yes, especially after witnessing children associated with the cult spewing such garbage at the RNC Convention. There is nothing in their activities having to do with spreading the Good News. Phelps serves a dividing spirit.
That is my closing argument, and I have no more to say on the subject.