Calvinism Is Back

[H. Ross Peron]

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Society/2010/0327/Christian-faith-Calvinism-is-back

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Understandable, tho I am not a Calvinist.  Calvinism can be a very comforting theology.  God is omnipotent and he will save the elect (of which if you are a Calvinist you almost surely believe you are one) regardless of their merits.

[afleitch]

Bit of a puff piece. Though I say that as someone who lives in a land of deconsecrated kirks.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Bit of a puff piece. Though I say that as someone who lives in a land of deconsecrated kirks.

I agree.  Calvinism is by no means prominent where I live (a tad ironic, considering New England is home to a number of historically prominent and influential Calvinists... Jonathan Edwards being one of them), but I see no evidence suggesting that it is 'on the rise.'  All this article appears to say is, "We're big because we're right and we have a lot of well-known followers and stuff."

But if people are going to church every week just to hear how bad they are, I see little incentive in going to church at all.  The other night I was transcribing a sermon by a man whom I assume was a staunch Calvinist (judging by his constant invocations of "the Elect" and whatnot), and it left me feeling neither good nor hungry - it left me feeling no better than dirt.

And hey, maybe that's the aim of those who preach it.  Maybe that's what's considered 'theologically correct' in certain circles.  Yet, it left me no desire to move on to the man's other sermon and transcribe that as well, lest I lose every remaining ounce of sanity I had left.

And that's just one sermon.  To personally realize that there are people who have been forced to listen to this hour-long bunk every Sunday since childhood worries me deeply, to say the least.  You seriously cannot escape without feeling some effect of brainwashing going on.

Now to be fair, this man probably isn't representative of a majority of Calvinist preachers, though I can't say for sure since I've never been to a Calvinist service, but I don't see any reason that people choose to listen to that stuff every week other than that they've been truly brainwashed.

EDIT: I read this over a couple times and I fully realize that I just made this thread about myself.  Do forgive me.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Calvinism gets some things right and some things wrong, just as with as any theology, Scott.  We are all sinners in the hands of God, and that is a message that often gets obscured in many churches today.  Where Calvinism gets it wrong is in focusing so much upon God's anger that Calvinists often seem to lose sight of God's love.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Article fails to actually make a case Calvinism is on the rise. The quoted statistics don't prove that.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I'm also surprised it didn't mention Mark Driscoll, seeing as how he's the most successful Calvinist contemporary pastor and a rare case of it actually rising. A real shame too, because Driscoll is probably one of the worst people in modern day Christianity, and not just for his Calvinism.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Driscoll isn't what I would call a Calvinist.  For instance, his views on predestination are more in accord with Luther than Calvin.

[H. Ross Peron]

Just asking, BRTD, but since you live in Minneapolis, do you ever go to John Piper's church?

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

I'm one of those crazy Calvinists, I don't know any others outside of my church, some British friends of mine, and the internet though.

[DC Al Fine]

Article fails to actually make a case Calvinism is on the rise. The quoted statistics don't prove that.

I concur. I see no popular upswing in our churches. To the extent that we're on the rise, its mostly due to high birth and retention rates. That said I have noticed an uptick in Calvinist ministers leaving Baptist seminaries.

[TJ in Oregon]

Bit of a puff piece. Though I say that as someone who lives in a land of deconsecrated kirks.

I agree.  Calvinism is by no means prominent where I live (a tad ironic, considering New England is home to a number of historically prominent and influential Calvinists... Jonathan Edwards being one of them), but I see no evidence suggesting that it is 'on the rise.'  All this article appears to say is, "We're big because we're right and we have a lot of well-known followers and stuff."

Well of course, they, being Calvinist don't need to say or do anything else, they're predestined for greatness

But if people are going to church every week just to hear how bad they are, I see little incentive in going to church at all.  The other night I was transcribing a sermon by a man whom I assume was a staunch Calvinist (judging by his constant invocations of "the Elect" and whatnot), and it left me feeling neither good nor hungry - it left me feeling no better than dirt.

And hey, maybe that's the aim of those who preach it.  Maybe that's what's considered 'theologically correct' in certain circles.  Yet, it left me no desire to move on to the man's other sermon and transcribe that as well, lest I lose every remaining ounce of sanity I had left.

And that's just one sermon.  To personally realize that there are people who have been forced to listen to this hour-long bunk every Sunday since childhood worries me deeply, to say the least.  You seriously cannot escape without feeling some effect of brainwashing going on.

Now to be fair, this man probably isn't representative of a majority of Calvinist preachers, though I can't say for sure since I've never been to a Calvinist service, but I don't see any reason that people choose to listen to that stuff every week other than that they've been truly brainwashed.

EDIT: I read this over a couple times and I fully realize that I just made this thread about myself.  Do forgive me.

This is probably the main redeeming quality of Calvinism, it doesn't exist to make us feel good--and contrition begins with guilt and shame for one's sins. Far too much about modern Christianity is done to make us feel good. We're supposed to be following a guy who got whipped, beaten, mocked, and nailed to a tree. If done with any semblance of earnestness it isn't going to be all rainbows and butterflies. But stopping there is like following Christ's life but only until the crucifixion; it tends toward forgetting the point of remorse, which is try and amend one's life, to go forth and to sin no more. It's not that God just wants us all to be miserable, but that he wants us to rend our lives. Since Calvinism is all about predermination, all of this is missing and we're left with just the shame and nowhere to go from there. But we're supposed to rise out of our bondage to sin and be the men and women (well, it's Atlas, so men, who am I kidding?) God created us to be. It still isn't going to all be rainbows and butterflies and still does require suffering, but we need to endure it and, when given a choice between God and sin, choose God. In a world of darkness, we are called to choose the light, not just as recompense for our sins, but because we are created in the image and likeness of God and as such have value.

Anyway, the article is an interesting portal, but basically just a set of anecdotes of how supposedly successful Calvinism, along with a good, but pretty standard indictment of self-help-Jesus Christianity. I'm not sure one can really ascertain the title "Calvinism is back" from anything presented in the articles contents. Wishful thinking IMO.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Just asking, BRTD, but since you live in Minneapolis, do you ever go to John Piper's church?

No. He is in pretty much all respects, theologically and politically, not my type.

[© tweed]

this is a four year old article and reads exactly like a four year old article.  conservative-evangelicals will always have their theological fads.

[Zioneer]

As a Mormon, I find the idea of Calvinism as I understand it (saved not by your works, but because God theoretically randomly chose you) revolting.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

I'm no expert on Calvinism, but I hope DC can politely clear this up for me. If you're predestined for either heaven or hell, then what's the point of anything? I suppose you'll respond that you don't do anything of your own volition and are consigned to whatever fate you have, but that just depresses the hell out of me. Then again, the laws of physics and the initial state of the universe also must constrain us to the eventual particular path we go down (unless quantum mechanics has something to say about that - I'm no expert on quantum physics, either), meaning that science is just as deterministic. But then why do we all choose to look when we cross the road, or at least seem to choose within the frameworks of our puny minds?

"One cannot base one's conduct on the idea that everything is determined, because one does not know what has been determined. Instead, one has to adopt the effective theory that one has free will and that one is responsible for one's actions. This theory is not very good at predicting human behavior, but we adopt it because there is no chance of solving the equations arising from the fundamental laws." - Stephen Hawking <-This basically sums up my views on the topic, for what it's worth. My, my, this is all so interesting, isn't it?

[© tweed]

the thing for people like Alfred to do is to read up on "compatibilism"

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

the thing for people like Alfred to do is to read up on "compatibilism"

It seems a pretty good description of my views, but it's not Calvinism (then again, I suppose I myself deserve some of the "credit" for nudging this thread into the philosophical direction). And aren't you supposed to be gone for good?

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Oddly enough, we spent Theology class arguing about this subject today. My teacher, who is a Calvinist, said that we don't have enough information to know about this for sure, and that the greater merits of Calvinism shouldn't be ignored. I have always been more in favor of Arminianism, and learning more about today, I can say that it is up my alley.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Oddly enough, we spent Theology class arguing about this subject today. My teacher, who is a Calvinist, said that we don't have enough information to know about this for sure, and that the greater merits of Calvinism shouldn't be ignored. I have always been more in favor of Arminianism, and learning more about today, I can say that it is up my alley.

Which it?  Calvinism or Arminianism?

[Randy Bobandy]

The way I understand it, God, in Calvinism, simply plays Duck, Duck, Goose with people ("You go to Heaven, you go to Heaven, you go to Hell, you go to Heaven..."), and we can do literally nothing to influence His decision in one way or the other. I'm not trying to be a dick, but what exactly draws people to Calvinism? Is it the idea that you can commit as many sins as you want, because you just may be one of the Elect, and, if you're not, you had a good run anyway? I'm very curious.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

The extent to which Calvinism is 'back' is also the extent to which it was never really gone. I don't think the size or influence of mainline Calvinist denominations has really fluctuated all that much in recent years (DC Al Fine or Mung Beans or somebody can correct me on this if I'm wrong about that), and as Tweed mentioned generalized conservative evangelicalism is prone to a sort of cyclical theological faddishness.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Oddly enough, we spent Theology class arguing about this subject today. My teacher, who is a Calvinist, said that we don't have enough information to know about this for sure, and that the greater merits of Calvinism shouldn't be ignored. I have always been more in favor of Arminianism, and learning more about today, I can say that it is up my alley.

Which it?  Calvinism or Arminianism?

Arminianism. Sorry, I type my posts in word to avoid spelling errors and get lost in what I'm trying to say sometimes

The way I understand it, God, in Calvinism, simply plays Duck, Duck, Goose with people ("You go to Heaven, you go to Heaven, you go to Hell, you go to Heaven..."), and we can do literally nothing to influence His decision in one way or the other. I'm not trying to be a dick, but what exactly draws people to Calvinism? Is it the idea that you can commit as many sins as you want, because you just may be one of the Elect, and, if you're not, you had a good run anyway? I'm very curious.

I'm sure that is a part of it to some degree, but Calvinism has many other ideas (democracy within the church, etc) that is not within Lutheranism (the Lutheran Church has a bishop system).

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The way I understand it, God, in Calvinism, simply plays Duck, Duck, Goose with people ("You go to Heaven, you go to Heaven, you go to Hell, you go to Heaven..."), and we can do literally nothing to influence His decision in one way or the other. I'm not trying to be a dick, but what exactly draws people to Calvinism? Is it the idea that you can commit as many sins as you want, because you just may be one of the Elect, and, if you're not, you had a good run anyway? I'm very curious.

I'm sure that is a part of it to some degree, but Calvinism has many other ideas (democracy within the church, etc) that is not within Lutheranism (the Lutheran Church has a bishop system).

Another is that I expect that the people drawn to Calvinism are likely to believe that they are part of the elect and aren't particularly looking for a "get out of Hell free" card to commit as many sins as they want .  One of the attractive features of Calvinism compared to Arminianism is that you don't have to worry about falling out of grace.  God won't let you do that.

[DC Al Fine]

The extent to which Calvinism is 'back' is also the extent to which it was never really gone. I don't think the size or influence of mainline Calvinist denominations has really fluctuated all that much in recent years (DC Al Fine or Mung Beans or somebody can correct me on this if I'm wrong about that), and as Tweed mentioned generalized conservative evangelicalism is prone to a sort of cyclical theological faddishness.

There's a cycle between Calvinism and Arminianism within the Baptist movement. Calvinism is definitely on the upswing right now. You're right though. There isn't any massive growth in the Reformed faith. We're growing yes, but it's slow.

The way I understand it, God, in Calvinism, simply plays Duck, Duck, Goose with people ("You go to Heaven, you go to Heaven, you go to Hell, you go to Heaven..."), and we can do literally nothing to influence His decision in one way or the other. I'm not trying to be a dick, but what exactly draws people to Calvinism? Is it the idea that you can commit as many sins as you want, because you just may be one of the Elect, and, if you're not, you had a good run anyway? I'm very curious.

I'm sure that is a part of it to some degree, but Calvinism has many other ideas (democracy within the church, etc) that is not within Lutheranism (the Lutheran Church has a bishop system).

Another is that I expect that the people drawn to Calvinism are likely to believe that they are part of the elect and aren't particularly looking for a "get out of Hell free" card to commit as many sins as they want .  One of the attractive features of Calvinism compared to Arminianism is that you don't have to worry about falling out of grace.  God won't let you do that.

I'm a bit surprised by socialisthoosier's criticism. Usually we're attacked for being Puritan prudes . Ernest is correct though, election and perseverance of the saints are the most comforting parts of our theology.