Why I am a Calvinist

There are a variety of theological persuasions in the world. One might say there are too many of them. We may go through denomination after denomination and find a great variety of beliefs and doctrines concerning things about God, things about Christ, things about man and so on. Yet these ideologies are but ripples from the great stone of the Gospel which was plunged into the lake of humanity.

All theological persuasions are not perfect. It is impossible that any theological system of doctrine be perfect for if it was perfect it would be the Scriptures themselves; for only the Word of God is inerrant, or without error. Man has undertaken the task, as commanded by God (2 Tim. 2:15), to understand God’s Word in spite of his lack of ability to understand it perfectly. He strives to apprehend what he can because a good theologian knows he cannot comprehend (or understand totally) everything about the Scriptures. But that gives us no excuse not to try.

In the endeavor to ascertain right doctrine, various systems have come up throughout church history. There have been the Arians, the Socinians, the Gnostics, the Roman Catholics, the Epicureans, the Docetics, the Pelagians, the Mormons, the Arminians, the Manicheans and so on. These though, should not be considered to be a true systems of right doctrine since each of them denies a major tenant of the Christian religion. One denies the deity of Christ, where another denies the humanity. One says heaven is attained by knowledge alone, another denies that people are sinners. One says God is not sovereign, and another says man is the measure of all things. One says man is God, and another says God is not all powerful. These systems of doctrines are clearly false. They remove or exalt a particular essential attribute, or many essential attributes of Christianity, not to mention adding many things which the Scriptures never teach. So it would rightly be said that they are systems, but it would also be equally fair to say that they are wrong systems.

So what is the right system of doctrine? From study, contemplation, and meditation and upon the Word of God, from assessing church history and the movements contained therein, from hearing hundred of speakers on varying subjects, and listening to a plethora of viewpoints on every aspect of the Bible, I rest upon the system of doctrine called "Calvinism." It is unfortunate for Calvinism that it is called Calvinism. Charles Spurgeon rightly stated that "Calvinism is nothing more than a nickname for Biblical Christianity." He was right. The name is often a warrant for despisement though. People say because we follow a man named Calvin, we are not following God. Does not Paul say in 1 Cor. 1:12, "Now I say this, that each of you says, "I am of Paul," "I am of Apollos," or "I am of Cephas," or I am of Christ." is Christ divided?" Paul is right. We are not to follow after men. We are to follow after God for sectarianism is a sin rebuked by the 1st chapter of 1 Corinthians. But do Calvinists really follow Calvin? No. It is actually wrong to call Calvinists "Calvinist" because they are doing nothing other than using the same body of doctrine that Calvin used, who in turn copied Augustine, who in turn copied the church fathers and they, who in turn, followed Christ and the Apostles. The early church fathers, who lived between 95 AD and 200 AD are just as much Calvinists, for understanding grace, as Augustine was a Calvinist, and as John Calvin was a Calvinist. Calvinism is nothing more than a label to show what view one holds upon the Scriptures, not upon a certain man. Someone may say, "That is not true. If you are a Calvinist, then you follow the teachings of Calvin and his interpretation of the Bible." Let us see if this is a worthy set of propositions. Because at the outset, they prove of necessity, nothing of the kind.

When I was 21, I had finished 2 years of Bible college. I went to an Arminian School, learned Arminian doctrine, and read Arminian books. I had no previous learning in religion until I attended that school, so I was indoctrinated in that theology without ever knowing whether it was true or false. In my naïveté I believed what I was taught (Surely not to question doctrine was my own mistake, but being indoctrinated in that way helped me to understand more about what I believe now. So it was the providence of God which kept me in my sin of false doctrine for a time.) Not too long after my second year, a friend of mine, who believed the doctrines of grace Calvinist began to challenge me on many of my "biblical" doctrines. I had a well rounded handle on the doctrine I possessed and propagated it thoroughly among my friends at school. But when this young man challenged me as he did, I was not able to refute him. The reason I was not able to refute his arguments had nothing to do with not understanding my own doctrine, for I did. But he came at me with something I did not expect; the Bible. He proposed a whole new system of doctrine which ran completely contrary to my own beliefs. My understanding of sin was so unbiblical that when he told me to read Romans 3:10-18, I was taken back by Paul’s poignant words. I was challenged by the very book I thought I understood. My views of man, Christ, God, salvation, sin, sovereignty, the will, and others were so warped and twisted that my young friend didn’t even need to rebuke me, for the Scriptures were doing it quite well. I had understood doctrine, it was just not the doctrine of the Bible.

So over the next summer, because of that day and that particular challenge of my friend, I devoted my time to reading through the entire Bible and endeavor to take it as it stood rather than what I wanted to read into it. My prayer was that the Lord would teach me His word by the power of the Holy Spirit so that I would know what it said rather than what I wanted it to say. After three months my views on man, Christ, God, sin, salvation and the like were radically transformed. (you would be amazed at what the Spirit of God will do with such a prayer and a simple reading of the Bible.) The point is this, my theology came out Calvinist without ever knowing what Calvinism was. I had not known what Calvin taught or that he was even a person. But my theology reflected nonetheless. The study of the Word of God transformed me. The Scriptures taught me, instead of me trying to teach it. So we see that being a Calvinist is not following after one man, but submitting under the authority of the Bible.

Why would someone want to be a Calvinist? Calvinism is not adherence to a person, but to a set of beliefs which are rightly in accord with the Bible. People who want to be right in their understanding of the doctrines of the Bible, adhere to Calvinism. Calvinism is not perfect. It is a system of doctrine worked over and over by countless men since the time of Christ. It will never be perfect because it is not inspired by God. So why should we believe Calvinism over and above other systems of doctrines? Because if we were to determine what system of doctrine hits closest to the bulls-eye of the Scriptures, Calvinism would be the first outer ring. Any system of doctrine which does serious damage to the doctrines of man, Christ, God, sin and salvation, cannot be considered worthy of our attention as Christians. And there is no system of doctrine which covers all these so Biblically as Calvinism.

What does Calvinism teach? Calvinism can be divided up into hundreds of points. There are a variety of propositions and ideas which are woven into the fabric of Calvinism. But if we were to concisely describe the simplistic form of Calvinism, we would look at the acronym T.U.L.I.P.: Total Depravity, Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace and Perseverance of the Saints.

The first doctrine of grace is Total Depravity. Total depravity keeps us humble. It states that man is totally and completely a sinner; heart, soul, mind and body, who can do no righteous deed. The image of God is so marred and twisted by the fall of Adam that every person who is conceived is at that point at enmity with God. They are enemies of God, they hate God, and they would even kill God if he showed up in their living room. As a matter of fact, when the Lord Jesus Christ came down to earth, they killed him.

Total Depravity is proven by both the Old and New Testaments: Genesis 6:5; Jeremiah 17:9; Romans 3:10-18. After one understands that he is a sinner who cannot by his own power come to faith, and that he has lost everything which would enable him to come to Christ because of the Fall and of his sin, then he comes to see Unconditional Election (Second doctrine). Man, being sinful cannot choose to follow God because he hates God. So God must remove the heart of stone and replace it with a heart of flesh. God chooses man. He unconditionally, not based upon anything a man can do which is good or evil, elects people to everlasting life. Its God’s job to save, and our job to praise Him for saving us. The Scriptures shows this doctrine emphatically: Malachi 1:2; Romans 8:29; Romans 9:1ff; Ephesians 1:3ff.

How does God save us? Yes, He elects us, but what is the basis for our election? It is not our work, but Christ’s work. God sends His Son to die for everyone whom He elects. The Son pays the price, and the debt is removed. When Jesus dies on the cross He secures salvation for everyone He dies for. And the work of Christ’s death and resurrection is transferred at that time to the account of all those who will be saved through Him. Jesus comes to die for God’s chosen people, His treasured possession. In this way the atonement is limited in scope but not in power (Third Doctrine). The Scriptures teach us this doctrine as well; Isaiah 53:1ff; Matthew 1:21; John 10:1ff; Acts 20:28; Ephesians 5:25.

The fourth doctrine of grace, or Calvinistic doctrine, is Irresistible Grace. If Jesus dies for the elect, and God unconditionally elects all those depraved people whom He calls His own, the regenerating power of the Spirit of God will not fail. Regeneration is where the Spirit changes the old heart of stone to a beating heart of flesh. And He does this prior to our faith. We believe on Christ after our sinful depraved souls are given the new capability to believe through the renewing power of God’s Spirit. His grace is then called irresistible, not because we believe against our will kicking and screaming, but our hearts are inclined to believe, so we love to believe and we go to Christ willingly. The Scriptures show us this in Psalms 51:10; 110:3; Jer. 31:33ff; John 3:2ff; Romans 2:29; Ephesians 2:8-10; Philippians 1:29; and 2:13.

The last main point of God’s grace seen so vividly in the doctrines of Calvinism is Perseverance of the Saints. All who are redeemed from their depraved states, all whom Christ came to ransom from death and pay the price to redeem from God’s wrath, all whom the Spirit irresistible touches with His grace, and all those who are unconditionally elected to eternal life will persevere to the end. They will sin, yes. But they will never fall away from grace. This does not give us a license to sin, for those who are truly changed are changed and have a new desire and new nature which releases them from the that the old depraved nature had on them. These saints persevere because God continually upholds them through the grace of Christ and the power of the Holy Spirit. They are God’s temples, His residing place. God dwells in the spirit of a man’s renewed heart. This, in and of itself, is an amazing thing!! And does the Scripture show us this doctrine? More than we could imagine: Phil. 1:6; Romans 8:30; John 10:28-29; John 17:2, 6, 9, 24; 1 Thess. 5:23.

What doctrines am I rejecting as a Calvinist? I am rejecting everything that "changes the truth of God for a lie, and denies Jesus Christ as our only Sovereign and Lord (Jude 4)." I am rejecting anything which would rise up and call itself a Gospel which is no gospel at all. I reject anything which exalts man to a place and position where he ought not to be, and decreases the grace of Christ. I reject anything which makes God a cosmic bell-hop tending to the commands and demands of sinful men as another gospel.

I reject anything which removes God’s sovereignty to place man as the Sovereign as another gospel. I reject anything which denies the sovereign decrees of God and His electing grace to put salvation into the hands of sinful men as another gospel. I reject anything which denies man’s total depravity and exalts his fictitious free will as another gospel. I reject anything which places the perseverance of man to glory in the incapable hands of a sinful man as another gospel.

I reject anything which endeavors to treat God as the great Grandfather in the sky beckoning and pleading with man to be saved as changing the true God into a pitiable wimp. This is another Gospel. I reject anything which denies the atonement of Christ for what it is; a substitutionary atonement on behalf of the elect. If we deny this, we deny the Gospel. I reject anything which makes the cross less than definite salvation for the elect, as another Gospel. I reject anything which is contrary to the Gospel of Jesus Christ as it is preached by Christ in His Word. It is to these Calvinistic doctrines and teachings which all Biblical Christians hold. It is these Calvinistic doctrines of grace which wild horses could in no way drag from me. Especially the wonderful doctrine of Christ’s atonement for His people. And what does Paul say about those who preach, teach, and believe another Gospel? Galatians 1:8 is emphatic, "If we, or an angel from heaven, preach to you any other Gospel than what we have preached, let him be anathema, (or accursed.)" They are not slapped on the wrist and sent to their heavenly rooms. They are cast into the deepest, darkest, hottest section of hell for perverting the truth of God’s Word. We see that the Gospel is something to contend about, and is something we need to be right about.

When I was 21, I had a form of godliness but I denied its power. I had a system of doctrine which denied Jesus as the only Sovereign and Lord. Yet, God in His mercy forgave that heinous sin of wrong belief. He allowed the scales to fall from my eyes. He allowed me, if you will, to be "born again, again." My mind has been renewed and my life transformed by these doctrines of grace. It is absolutely true what Spurgeon said, that Calvinism is nothing other than a nickname for Biblical Christianity. And until a person understands these doctrines, his walk with God will be a superficial walk. The doctrines of God’s grace, which are the doctrines of Calvinism, plunge us deep within the fountain of God’s mercy and power. Without understanding God’s election of depraved people, how can anyone understand what grace is really about?—they can’t.

Why am I a Calvinist? Because God will not allow me to be anything else. He has opened my eyes to depth beyond my wildest aspirations. He continues to humble me, the rebellious sinner, before His awesome majesty and power. May it be that all of God’s people would be humbled by His grace.

"Which heresies would these be?"

Which heresies???

Why, it would be the heresies identified in the following::

Out of love and concern for the truth, and with the object of eliciting it, the following heads will be the subject of a public discussion at Wittenberg under the presidency of the reverend father, Martin Luther, Augustinian, Master of Arts and Sacred Theology, and duly appointed Lecturer on these subjects in that place. He requests that whoever cannot be present personally to debate the matter orally will do so in absence in writing.

When our Lord and Master, Jesus Christ, said "Repent", He called for the entire life of believers to be one of penitence.

The word cannot be properly understood as referring to the sacrament of penance, i.e. confession and satisfaction, as administered by the clergy.

Yet its meaning is not restricted to penitence in one's heart; for such penitence is null unless it produces outward signs in various mortifications of the flesh.

As long as hatred of self abides (i.e. true inward penitence) the penalty of sin abides, viz., until we enter the kingdom of heaven.

The pope has neither the will nor the power to remit any penalties beyond those imposed either at his own discretion or by canon law.

The pope himself cannot remit guilt, but only declare and confirm that it has been remitted by God; or, at most, he can remit it in cases reserved to his discretion. Except for these cases, the guilt remains untouched.

God never remits guilt to anyone without, at the same time, making humbly submissive to the priest, His representative.

The penitential canons apply only to men who are still alive, and, according to the canons themselves, none applies to the dead.

Accordingly, the Holy Spirit, acting in the person of the pope, manifests grace to us, by the fact that the papal regulations always cease to apply at death, or in any hard case.

It is a wrongful act, due to ignorance, when priests retain the canonical penalties on the dead in purgatory.

When canonical penalties were changed and made to apply to purgatory, surely it would seem that tares were sown while the bishops were asleep.

In former days, the canonical penalties were imposed, not after, but before absolution was pronounced; and were intended to be tests of true contrition.

Death puts and end to all the claims of the Church; even the dying are already dead to the canon laws, and are no longer bound by them.

Defective piety or love in a dying person is necessarily accompanied by great fear, which is greatest where the piety or love is least.

This fear or horror is sufficient in itself, whatever else might be said, to constitute the pain of purgatory, since it approaches very closely to the horror of despair.

There seems to be the same difference between hell, purgatory, and heaven as between despair, uncertainty, and assurance.

Of a truth, the pains of souls in purgatory ought to be abated, and charity ought to be proportionately increased.

Moreover, it does not seem proved, on any grounds of reason or Scripture, that these souls are outside the state of merit, or unable to grow in grace.

Nor does it seem proved to be always the case that they are certain and assured of salvation, even if we are very certain ourselves.

Therefore the pope, in speaking of the plenary remission of all penalties, does not mean "all" in the strict sense, but only those imposed by himself.

Hence those who preach indulgences are in error when they say that a man is absolved and saved from every penalty by the pope's indulgences;

Indeed, he cannot remit to souls in purgatory any penalty which canon law declares should be suffered in the present life.

If plenary remission could be granted to anyone at all, it would be only in the cases of the most perfect, i.e. to very few.

It must therefore be the case that the major part of the people are deceived by that indiscriminate and high-sounding promise of relief from penalty.

The same power as the pope exercises in general over purgatory is exercised in particular by every single bishop in his bishopric and priest in his parish.

The pope does excellently when he grants remission to the souls in purgatory on account of intercessions made on their behalf, and not by the power of the keys (which he cannot exercise for them).

There is no divine authority for preaching that the soul flies out of the purgatory immediately the money clinks in the bottom of the chest.

It is certainly possible that when the money clinks in the bottom of the chest avarice and greed increase; but when the church offers intercession, all depends in the will of God.

Who knows whether all souls in purgatory wish to be redeemed in view of what is said of St. Severinus and St. Pascal? (Note: Paschal I, pope 817-24. The legend is that he and Severinus were willing to endure the pains of purgatory for the benefit of the faithful).

No one is sure if the reality of his own contrition, much less of receiving plenary forgiveness.

One who, bona fide, buys indulgence is a rare as a bona fide penitent man, i.e. very rare indeed.

All those who believe themselves certain of their own salvation by means if letters of indulgence, will be eternally damned, together with their teachers.

We should be most carefully on our guard against those who say that the papal indulgences are an inestimable divine gift, and that a man is reconciled to God by them.

For the grace conveyed by these indulgences relates simply to the penalties of the sacramental "satisfactions" decreed merely by man.

It is not in accordance with Christian doctrines to preach and teach that those who buy off souls, or purchase confessional licenses, have no need to repent of their own sins.

Any Christian whatsoever, who is truly repentant, enjoys plenary remission from penalty and guilt, and this is given him without letters of indulgence.

Any true Christian whatsoever, living or dead, participates in all the benefits of Christ and the Church; and this participation is granted to him by God without letters of indulgence.

Yet the pope's remission and dispensation are in no way to be despised, form as already said, they proclaim the divine remission.

It is very difficult, even for the most learned theologians, to extol to the people the great bounty contained in the indulgences, while, at the same time, praising contrition as a virtue.

A truly contrite sinner seeks out, and loves to pay, the penalties of his sins; whereas the very multitude of indulgences dulls men's consciences, and tends to make them hate the penalties.

Papal indulgences should only be preached with caution, lest people gain a wrong understanding, and think that they are preferable to other good works: those of love.

Christians should be taught that the pope does not at all intend that the purchase of indulgences should be understood as at all comparable with the works of mercy.

Christians should be taught that one who gives to the poor, or lends to the needy, does a better action than if he purchases indulgences.

Because, by works of love, love grows and a man becomes a better man; whereas, by indulgences, he does not become a better man, but only escapes certain penalties.

Christians should be taught that he who sees a needy person, but passes him by although he gives money for indulgences, gains no benefit from the pope's pardon, but only incurs the wrath of God.

Christians should be taught that, unless they have more than they need, they are bound to retain what is only necessary for the upkeep of their home, and should in no way squander it on indulgences.

Christians should be taught that they purchase indulgences voluntarily, and are not under obligation to do so.

Christians should be taught that, in granting indulgences, the pope has more need, and more desire, for devout prayer on his own behalf than for ready money.

Christians should be taught that the pope's indulgences are useful only if one does not rely on them, but most harmful if one loses the fear of God through them.

Christians should be taught that, if the pope knew the exactions of the indulgence-preachers, he would rather the church of St. Peter were reduced to ashes than be built with the skin, flesh, and bones of the sheep.

Christians should be taught that the pope would be willing, as he ought if necessity should arise, to sell the church of St. Peter, and give, too, his own money to many of those whom the pardon-merchants conjure money.

It is vain to rely on salvation by letters if indulgence, even if the commissary, or indeed the pope himself, were to pledge his own soul for their validity.

Those are enemies of Christ and the pope who forbid the word of God to be preached at all in some churches, in order that indulgences may be preached in others.

The word of God suffers injury if, in the same sermon, an equal or longer time is devoted to indulgences than to that word.

The pope cannot help taking the view that if indulgences (very small matters) are celebrated by one bell, one pageant, or one ceremony, the gospel (a very great matter) should be preached to the accompaniment of a hundred bells, a hundred processions, a hundred ceremonies.

The treasures of the church, out of which the pope dispenses indulgences, are not sufficiently spoken of or known among the people of Christ.

That these treasures are note temporal are clear from the fact that many of the merchants do not grant them freely, but only collect them.

Nor are they the merits of Christ and the saints, because, even apart from the pope, these merits are always working grace in the inner man, and working the cross, death, and hell in the outer man.

St. Laurence said that the poor were the treasures of the church, but he used the term in accordance with the custom of his own time.

We do not speak rashly in saying that the treasures of the church are the keys of the church, and are bestowed by the merits of Christ.

For it is clear that the power of the pope suffices, by itself, for the remission of penalties and reserved cases.

The true treasure of the church is the Holy gospel of the glory and the grace of God.

It is right to regard this treasure as most odious, for it makes the first to be the last.

On the other hand, the treasure of indulgences is most acceptable, for it makes the last to be the first.

Therefore the treasures of the gospel are nets which, in former times, they used to fish for men of wealth.

The treasures of the indulgences are the nets to-day which they use to fish for men of wealth.

The indulgences, which the merchants extol as the greatest of favors, are seen to be, in fact, a favorite means for money-getting.

Nevertheless, they are not to be compared with the grace of God and the compassion shown in the Cross.

Bishops and curates, in duty bound, must receive the commissaries of the papal indulgences with all reverence;

But they are under a much greater obligation to watch closely and attend carefully lest these men preach their own fancies instead of what the pope commissioned.

Let him be anathema and accursed who denies the apostolic character of the indulgences.

On the other hand, let him be blessed who is on his guard against the wantonness and license of the pardon-merchant's words.

In the same way, the pope rightly excommunicates those who make any plans to the detriment of the trade in indulgences.

It is much more in keeping with his views to excommunicate those who use the pretext of indulgences to plot anything to the detriment of holy love and truth.

It is foolish to think that papal indulgences have so much power that they can absolve a man even if he has done the impossible and violated the mother of God.

We assert the contrary, and say that the pope's pardons are not able to remove the least venial of sins as far as their guilt is concerned.

When it is said that not even St. Peter, if he were now pope, could grant a greater grace, it is blasphemy against St. Peter and the pope.

We assert the contrary, and say that he, and any pope whatever, possesses greater graces, viz., the gospel, spiritual powers, gifts of healing, etc., as is declared in 1 Corinthians. 12.

It is blasphemy to say that the insignia of the cross with the papal arms are of equal value to the cross on which Christ died.

The bishops, curates, and theologians, who permit assertions of that kind to be made to the people without let or hindrance, will have to answer for it.

This unbridled preaching of indulgences makes it difficult for learned men to guard the respect due to the pope against false accusations, or at least from the keen criticisms of the laity;

They ask, e.g.: Why does not the pope liberate everyone from purgatory for the sake of love (a most holy thing) and because of the supreme necessity of their souls? This would be morally the best of all reasons. Meanwhile he redeems innumerable souls for money, a most perishable thing, with which to build St. Peter's church, a very minor purpose.

Again: Why should funeral and anniversary masses for the dead continue to be said? And why does not the pope repay, or permit to be repaid, the benefactions instituted for these purposes, since it is wrong to pray for those souls who are now redeemed?

Again: Surely this is a new sort of compassion, on the part of God and the pope, when an impious man, an enemy of God, is allowed to pay money to redeem a devout soul, a friend of God; while yet that devout and beloved soul is not allowed to be redeemed without payment, for love's sake, and just because of its need of redemption.

Again: Why are the penitential canon laws, which in fact, if not in practice, have long been obsolete and dead in themselves,-why are they, to-day, still used in imposing fines in money, through the granting of indulgences, as if all the penitential canons were fully operative?

Again: since the pope's income to-day is larger than that of the wealthiest of wealthy men, why does he not build this one church of St. Peter with his own money, rather than with the money of indigent believers?

Again: What does the pope remit or dispense to people who, by their perfect penitence, have a right to plenary remission or dispensation?

Again: Surely a greater good could be done to the church if the pope were to bestow these remissions and dispensations, not once, as now, but a hundred times a day, for the benefit of any believer whatever.

What the pope seeks by indulgences is not money, but rather the salvation of souls; why then does he not suspend the letters and indulgences formerly conceded, and still as efficacious as ever?

These questions are serious matters of conscience to the laity. To suppress them by force alone, and not to refute them by giving reasons, is to expose the church and the pope to the ridicule of their enemies, and to make Christian people unhappy.

If therefore, indulgences were preached in accordance with the spirit and mind of the pope, all these difficulties would be easily overcome, and indeed, cease to exist.

Away, then, with those prophets who say to Christ's people, "Peace, peace," where in there is no peace.

Hail, hail to all those prophets who say to Christ's people, "The cross, the cross," where there is no cross.

Christians should be exhorted to be zealous to follow Christ, their Head, through penalties, deaths, and hells;

And let them thus be more confident of entering heaven through many tribulations rather than through a false assurance of peace.

-Martin Luther, October 31, 1517 (The Hammer Blow heard 'round the world!)

Jean

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.