Heresies of Calvinism
While Calvinists view Calvinism as the standard by which the Bible is
to be interpreted rather than allowing the tenets of Calvinism to be
scrutinized by the Bible, such is not the case for many of us
Christians who are of a Berean mindset, who scrutize everything in
light of scripture. For "the Bereans were of more
noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message
with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if
what Paul said was true." Acts 17:11 All opinions and
alleged inspirational ideas are to be subject to scrutiny. "Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others
judge." 1Cor 14:29 God called us not to show favoritism
as some do, sacrificing true for the sake of institutional allegiance.
Regardless of the celebrity status that some post-Biblical theologians
of the past or present hold, regardless of one's popularity or the
popularity of certain theological concepts, "Do
not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are
from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world." 1John
4:1
I have studied Calvinism and it basis in Augustinian theology. I have
discuss these ideas and debated with Calvinists. I believe I am
representing Calvinism accurately in this article. But if there are
Calvinists who think otherwise let them say so. And I also challenge
Calvinists to prove their theological heresies, which I'll present, to
be scripturally sound.
The Unjust god of Calvinism
Now one of the main assumptions of Calvinism is that God holds people
accountable for things over which they have no control. He condemns
people not for doing anything wrong, but for simply having a sinful
nature, a nature that He himself gave them at birth, a decision of
which they had no control over. This naturally
calls into question God's judicial nature. Under Calvinism God is not
just "in human terms". Indeed I have heard Calvinists use this very
phrase. Now when we preach the gospel, we're preaching to humans, are
we not? So when a Calvinist preaches the gospel in human terms, without
hypocrisy, he has to say that God is unjust; that God imputes sin to
those who didn't do anything wrong. It's like one who is prejudice "in
human terms". A prejudice person judges others unjustly based on race
or ethnic background or the like. Calvinists basically think that God
is like that.
Now about this idea of imputing guilt, I've heard Calvinists use the
argument that if God can't impute guilt to the innocent, then neither
can he impute righteousnes to the guilty. That simply doesn't follow.
It's a non-sequitor argument. For while it is not unjust for a person
in prison guilty of a crime to be pardoned by grace, it is certainly
unjust for an innocent person to be put in prison, punished for a crime
he didn't commit. But not from a Calvinist's perspective. The god of
Calvinism is unjust, whereas concerning the God of the Bible, "God is just" 2Th 1:6
Now concerning the application of this heresy of imputed guilt, their
application is two-fold. First is the Augustinian concept of
"Original
Sin" whereby they think children are reckoned guilty for the sins of
their parents. Augustine speaks of this for example in his book 1
chapter 46 entitled, "it is probable that children are involved in
the guilt not only of the first pair, but of their own immediate
parents." among other places. In contrast the Bible says, "Fathers
shall not be put to death for their children, nor children put to death
for their fathers; each is to die for his own sin." Deut
24:16 Secondly is their view that Christ, "a
lamb without blemish or defect" 1Peter
1:19, was imputed with guilt. Thus rather than viewing Christ's
death as a murder, they view it as a justified action - that Christ
died guilty and not innocent.
However there is division in the Calvinist camp involving nuances
concerning the basis upon which God condemns people due to original
sin. One, as I mentioned is the idea that people are condemned simply
because they are born with a sinful nature. In this case, condemnation
has nothing to do with "guilt". Is purely prejudicial. The other is, as
I mention the idea that "guilt" is transferred from Adam to his
descendants. Yet whichever stand Calvinists take, they both portray God
as unjust.
Of course if these ideas were true then not only would God's judicial
nature be called into question, but also the significance of Christ's
death. First of all since Christ, though being more than just a man,
was human of which Calvinists will agree, unless they are going to deny
that Jesus Christ came in the flesh. Indeed in Luke 3:38 Adam
is in the list of his ancestors. So if Jesus is a son of Adam,
according to the flesh, he must have "original sin" else he isn't
human, which under Calvinism means that he must be reckoned guilty for
Adam's sin, just like the Calvinists reckon of the rest of mankind.
Now granted that Christ indeed had come in the flesh. He was tempted in
every way as we are - yet didn't commit any sin. (Heb 4:14) In
what ways are we tempted? If Christ's flesh didn't have a sinful
nature, then he wasn't in fact tempted in all ways as we are. Thus
Christ was subject to the Biblical concept of original sin, which is
namely the passing on of the sinful nature and the inevitable death of
the flesh. But the Biblical concept of original sin is not that
children are reckoned guilty of the sins of their parents. That's a
Calvinistic heresy, having its basis in Augustinian theology.
The Logical Irrelevance of Christ's Death under
Calvinism
Now since God is unjust under Calvinism, Christ didn't have to die. For
if Christ's death had to do with satisfying God's judicial nature, as
the Bible indicates, what's up with that, seeing as under Calvinism God
doesn't have a judicial nature.
A Puppet theology - Calvinist denial of Free Will
Under Calvinism people are puppets. To the Calvinist for people to do
anything from their free will takes away God's sovereignty, and thus
they deny free will. Their "god" is incapable of creating free will
creatures. He just doesn't have the capacity to do so. Now because
their "god" is unjust, they of course have no problem with the idea of
god imputing guilt to these puppets and throwing them into hell. Truly
the god of Calvinism is a sadistic monster. Under Calvinism people
cannot but sin. They have no choice but to sin. And where there is only
one choice that is the same as saying there is no choice.
The god of Calvinism is rather peculiar. He speaks in the imperative,
giving lots of commands to his puppets who apparently have no ability
with which to act upon such commands. And then he holds them
accountable for what they have done or failed to do. The god of
Calvinism is pretty much nuts.
But it would seem the Calvinist is likewise nuts. Have they taken any
thought to the implications of their doctrines? Are they just a bunch
of mindless denonminational zombies (or might I say "puppets"?)so
indoctrinated into their heresies? Consider, if people are just puppets
as the Calvinists propose, then who is doing the sinning? Would the
Calvinists deny their god's sovereignty in that realm?
Calvinistic Heresies of Election
Concerning election, one of the heresies of Calvinism is that God
doesn't want all men to be saved but rather only wishes a variety of
men be saved, as He has chosen in puppet-like fashion. According to
their doctrines, when they preach the gospel they cannot say that "God
loves you and wants you to have eternal life". In fact under
Calvinism
they should say, "God may hate you and may have predestined you to
eternal damnation and there's nothing that can be done about it."
For example Mark Driscoll cofounder of the Acts 29 Calvinist
organization speaking for God says, "God looks down and says 'I hate
you, you are my enemy, and I will crush you" Funny
how the Bible commands us to love our enemies without prejudice while
Calvinists view that same God as hating people prejudicially. Indeed
under Calvinism God prejudges people before they are even born. Not
suprising how Calvinists often turn out, given their concepts of God.
Also under Calvinism Christ didn't die for the sins of the world, but
only for the sins of the elect. In contrast the Bible says, "He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not
only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world."
1John 2:2
The Calvinistic Heresy of Regeneration
According to the Bible, "to those who believed in
his name, he gave the right to become children of God—". John
1:12b That is, people are not given the right to become children of
God until they believe in Christ. Gal 3:26 "You are all sons of God through faith in Christ
Jesus," But Calvinists have it backwards. Under Calvinism a
person cannot believe until he's been born of God. They get the order
of faith and regeneration backwards.
Infant Baptism and the Trivialization of Faith
Now while some will argue that the heresy of infant baptism is not a
part of Calvinism, in fact it was very much a part of Calvin's
theology. In fact in Calvin's day Calvinists would put Christians to
death who didn't believe in infant baptism. Today many so called
"Calvinists" would have have been murdered by their own theological
forefathers, had they gone back in time for a visit!
Padeobaptism is an application of Calvinism. Babies, who have yet to
believe in Christ, are baptized into the faith and reckoned members of
the Church apart from faith in Christ. This heresy is NO DIFFERENT than
what Paul wrote to the Galatians concerning the heresy of the
circumcision. Indeed Calvinism, drawing on Augustine's writings, likens
baptism to circumcision, which was done to infants when they were just
8 days old. So this ceremony in which some ceremony is performed on the
flesh of an infant is construed as reflecting his righteous status with
God, regardless of the faith of the infant.
These examples of putting regeneration and election prior to faith, and
this heresy of padeobaptism reflect the Calvinist's trivialization of
saving faith. Indeed "faith" to the Calvinist is merely a gift, merely
a byproduct of salvation rather than the means to be saved. For the
Bible says, "Therefore, having been justified by
faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ" Rom
5:1
Furthermore, to quote a Calvinist "For Calvin, covenant infants
are baptized on largely the grounds that adults are baptized-we assume
they are believers. In other words, infant baptism is, as it were,
believers' baptism." Calvin had a ravenous hatred of those opposed
his opinion concerning infant baptism, declaring a curse on those who
didn't baptize their infants. "God will take vengeance on every one
who despises to impress the symbol of the covenant on his child,
(Genesis 17: 15) such contempt being a rejection, and, as it were,
abjuration of the offered grace." And he exercises such contempt
rather violently as he says, "God furnishes us with other weapons
to repress their stupidity." Cutting people's heads off and
burning alleged heretics with fire - these were the weapons God
furnished him with.
The Calvinisic Heresy of non-Salvation
Under Calvinism people are not saved or unsaved. They are either elect
or non-elect, and their elect status is assigned to them before they
are born. Thus even from their birth, the elect are never really not
saved. Under Calvinism the salvation status of the elect has no
correlation to their faith.
The Berean Christian Bible
Study
Resources
Sep 25,2009