Calvinism And Fundies

[debrand]

I have noticed that many of our fundies have Calvinist leanings. Even Westboro Baptist Church has been described as practicing hyper Calvinism.

Because I've known Calvinist in real life who were reasonable people, I am curious about the connection with Calvinism and fundamentalism.

 

Ray Comfort has been described as following Calvinism. The folks at Vision Forum are admirers of John Calvin. I don't think that Michael and Debbi Pearl are Calvinist so I don't want it to sound as if I think that all fundamentalists share the same beliefs.

 

Do any of you have any idea why Calvinism would be so popular with some Fundamentalists?

[Not That Kind of Dr]

I wonder if some of it for the VF crowd is to distinguish themselves from other Christian fundamentalists whom they consider less educated and more overwrought. VFers put so much emphasis on "a good, systematic theology" and intellectually demanding sermons that it seems like a direct rebuke to other types of evangelicals, such as Pentecostals or Southern Baptists, who have a more openly emotional and seemingly casual style of worship. At best, they're more worried about a preacher's calling from God than his (or her, in the case of Pentecostals) academic credentials. At worst, they're virulently anti-intellectual. Of course, there's always the comfort/cudgel of predestination for Calvinists, and you can't underestimate the value of that to the VF crowd. How delightful to suspect that you've been saved from the beginning of time while your enemies have been damned, and there is nothing that they can do about it!

[Patsy]

I hadn't thought about this at all before, and it's a really interesting question. I'll be watching this thread, I'm sure it will throw up some really interesting ideas.

In the meanwhiles, some thoughts from the top of my head:

- VF emphasis on old-timey culture, as found in a lot of other 'types' of fundamentalism we look at here. I don't know if mainstream (including megachurch-y) American fundamentalism is usually Calvinist. If it isn't, there's perhaps a bit of a line you could draw there - mainstream fundamentalism may have an emphasis on more 'traditional' roles, but it doesn't have that faux-Victoriana thing going on like VF and some other fundamentalism we look at (for instance they can have pop music, shorts, public school, slang, and other modern things so long as they're 'wholesome'). Calvinism, from my understanding, links together OT and NT outlooks moreso than non-Calvinist stuff. Maybe there's a link there? (I'm not sure if I've explained that thought well.)

- Intellectualism? I'm sure most Christians, whether fundamentalist or not, have wrested their own theology from the determinism of God's omniscience - perhaps Calvinism is the smartest way of dealing with it, by going "Yes actually it is precisely as it seems"? This doesn't really sit with my idea of which fundamentalists have a Calvinist view, though, because a lot of them aren't exactly intellectual/pretending to be intellectual and well-read.

- Being able to effectively 'lose' your salvation? Most think that's NOT a valid concept, but with some types of Calvinism you could probably say not that someone has LOST their salvation or 'backslid', but that they have now come to show that they didn't have it, when before they assumed they did. If being God's elect means you're favoured, then any sign that you're not favoured (not following the head priest's latest whims on doctrine, say) could show that you were never actually part of that elect. I'm not even sure if this is an accepted part of Calvinism.

Like I said ^ I don't know much about Calvinism,

(For instance - how DO you know you're saved? Is it just that the behind-the-scenes stuff of you coming to accept Jesus is pre-ordained, or do you do something other than accept Jesus and then lean on grace?)

so... yeah.

[maybeizfundie]

I agree that some of it may be the leaning towards "old timey" stuff. Calvinism goes back about as far as protestantism goes, so those who want "a historic faith" but not Catholicism would look in that direction.

QF is actually a very logical outgrowth of the Calvinistic viewpoint (God's sovreignty). It's interesting to me that modern, mainstream Calvinists reject it, actually.

[xDreamerx]

I could be wrong but don't Calvinists believe in having a predetermined destiny, being bound for either or heaven or hell from the moment of birth? And the only way to gain redemption or any hope of it is to live in accordance to what they determine to be God's laws, even then one is not guaranteed to be saved and salvation can snatched from you at any moment?

If one holds this puritanical, severe, fearful view it lends itself very easily to authoritarianism and legalism. I think these groups know it sets up a rigid environment and the leaders use that to their advantage. If there is only one way to do something and you're selling a product which claims to give people "the answers", you'll cash in. I don't think people like Doug Phillips believes what he believe simply because it means something to him or he was raised to believe it. He also believes it because it's profitable.

Edited to fix my typos.

[AnnoDomini]

My family is Calvinist, so I may be able to answer some questions. Ok,as I understand it, salvation is pre-ordained for the elect from the beginning of time, and there's nothing anyone can do to gain or reject salvation--God is in complete control. Once you're saved, you cannot lose your salvation.

[Patsy]

Is there a sure-fire way to know that you ARE saved, though? Like, you can't lose your salvation, but can you discover that actually you just wrongfully thought you were saved? (Which is, in effect, losing your salvation.)

[bbfreethinker]

My family is Calvinist, so I may be able to answer some questions. Ok,as I understand it, salvation is pre-ordained for the elect from the beginning of time, and there's nothing anyone can do to gain or reject salvation--God is in complete control. Once you're saved, you cannot lose your salvation.

So, then either:

a. I'm still saved from when I was a Christian, even though I now call myself an atheist, or

b. I was never saved because I was pre-ordained not to be saved, and nothing I do can save me.

[GenerationCedarchip]

Is there a sure-fire way to know that you ARE saved, though? Like, you can't lose your salvation, but can you discover that actually you just wrongfully thought you were saved? (Which is, in effect, losing your salvation.)

And that's where I can see Calvinism lending itself quite well to a slide into fundamentalism. Even in mainline Calvinist churches, I've been taught that the salvation can work itself out in the fruits of the Spirit and that those who are saved are saved by grace but will respond with action. I can easily see how being moved to do things for God as we're taught could twist itself into legalism so that we can show the world we're "saved" - and that seems to be what goes on in at least some of the fundie Calvinist churches.

[Grace]

I know a Calvinist whose view is that it's more like God is all-knowing so he already knows how it all ends, not that he picked some random people and said "You're saved, the rest of you are SOL." The whole Calvinist idea still kind of freaks me out though.

Edited because spelling the topic correctly is fun

[GenerationCedarchip]

I know a Calvinist whose view is that it's more like God is all-knowing so he already knows how it all ends, not that he picked some random people and said "You're saved, the rest of you are SOL." The whole Calvinist idea still kind of freaks me out though.

Edited because spelling the topic correctly is fun

That is a great way to phrase what seems to be the mainstream view. God knows who will respond and choose to follow. However, fundies seem to get all hung up on the other end of things, go legalistic and try to prove by works that they're part of the elect rather than thinking more about the grace involved.

[Patsy]

And that's where I can see Calvinism lending itself quite well to a slide into fundamentalism. Even in mainline Calvinist churches, I've been taught that the salvation can work itself out in the fruits of the Spirit and that those who are saved are saved by grace but will respond with action. I can easily see how being moved to do things for God as we're taught could twist itself into legalism so that we can show the world we're "saved" - and that seems to be what goes on in at least some of the fundie Calvinist churches.

You have perfectly expressed what I was trying to.

[finleeport]

I always thought of Calvinism to be scary, especially the whole Predestination thing, if we are destined to hell at the moment of birth, then why worship God in the first place?

Another thing, there is a heresy called Antinomianism, which is if your one of the elect then your free to do whatever you want, no matter how evil it is. I think there was a group from the English Civil War called the Ranters, they believed in antinomianism and some sort of Pantheism. But nobody believes they existed.

[liltwinstar]

I remember being told that if we were "elect" we'd naturally *want* to keep all of God's laws. Which meant that any time I sinned, I was afraid that my sin meant I wasn't actually elect - becuase if I was elect, I wouldn't have wanted to sin in the first place.

I think Calvinism is seriously fucked up.

[antifundie]

I also remember the 5 points of Calvinism--the first of which is the idea of "Total Depravity."

TULIP:

Total Depravity

Unconditional Election

Limited Atonement (!!!!!!!!!!! WTF?)

Irresistible Grace

Perseverance of the Saints

The wiki article makes point one sound somewhat normal-it's the idea that all people are born sinful. However, it can lead to really really bad things--like beating infants, because we're born sinful and without the capacity to love or follow God. I don't really know how this works with the idea of free will, but I'm not a theologian.

I also find the idea of Limited Atonement to be abhorrent. It was taught to me that basically, Jesus didn't die for everybody, he died for the elect. I'm pretty sure that's NOT what the Bible says, and it seems (to me) to be a very cruel and exclusive doctrine, and one that is harmful to both Christians and non-Christians. Christians because then they would always doubt, and non-Christians because Christians would mean about that whole "I'm saved and you're not" thing. Ugh.

[debrand]

I remember being told that if we were "elect" we'd naturally *want* to keep all of God's laws. Which meant that any time I sinned, I was afraid that my sin meant I wasn't actually elect - becuase if I was elect, I wouldn't have wanted to sin in the first place.

I think Calvinism is seriously fucked up.

This will sound odd but I did attend a church that wasn't Calvinistic but I was taught something similar. I think that some churches have been influenced by Calvinism without considering themselves Calvinist.

I was taught that real salvation meant that a person would not want to sin. A real Christian would never loose their faith.

[GenerationCedarchip]

I also remember the 5 points of Calvinism--the first of which is the idea of "Total Depravity."

TULIP:

Total Depravity

Unconditional Election

Limited Atonement (!!!!!!!!!!! WTF?)

Irresistible Grace

Perseverance of the Saints

The wiki article makes point one sound somewhat normal-it's the idea that all people are born sinful. However, it can lead to really really bad things--like beating infants, because we're born sinful and without the capacity to love or follow God. I don't really know how this works with the idea of free will, but I'm not a theologian.

I also find the idea of Limited Atonement to be abhorrent. It was taught to me that basically, Jesus didn't die for everybody, he died for the elect. I'm pretty sure that's NOT what the Bible says, and it seems (to me) to be a very cruel and exclusive doctrine, and one that is harmful to both Christians and non-Christians. Christians because then they would always doubt, and non-Christians because Christians would mean about that whole "I'm saved and you're not" thing. Ugh.

The way I've always heard Limited Atonement explained in non-fundie churches is this: God already knows how it's all going to play out. Some will choose to accept Christ and be saved, but God knows that not everyone is going to accept Christ. So - if you believe, then this means you are one of the elect and you are saved by what Christ did. The "limited" in "limited atonement" comes from the understanding that there are those will will reject Christ and they are not saved. Or, at least that's the theology-in-a-nutshell version that I've heard in several churches.

[antifundie]

That explanation of Limited Atonement makes some sense, but it (to me) makes it sound like the limits where placed by God, and not by humankind's free will, you know?

I freely admit that I think some of my mistaken and/or messed up views of certain theologies come from a "family-integrated" church from my youth, since I think it was pretty easy for me (as a kid) to misunderstand long, theological sermons and come away with "I'm a worm, and Jesus may or may not have died for me, not sure."

[punkiepie]

Hi, I am new here-long time lurker, but I had to register for this topic!

I grew up in an fundie IFBC that was split between Calvinists and Arminians and it took me years and years plus a lot of researching to unravel the knots of damage that caused. Calvinism completely screwed up my faith and to be able to salvage it all, I did a lot of studying so that I can figure out what I actually believed and not what I was indoctrinated to believe.

Here are some of the things I think are important to know about Calvinism/ists. These are mostly generalizations, I'm not trying to pigeon hole anything, so please don't take offense if you're a Calvinist.

1. The general perception, and self-perception, of Calvinists is that they are more educated than their Arminian counterparts and that is probably, for the most part, true. But a large majority of Calvinists were raised in, or "saved" by, an Arminian church group. Then when they went to college/seminary, they discovered the world of Calvin and figured out they were one of God's chosen "elect." Another reason this perception/actuality exists is that almost all IFB churches are filled with uneducated Arminians, with pastors who went to fundie seminaries, super fundie unaccredited seminaries, or took the path that they didn't need a seminary degree at all because all educational institutions are of the devil- a la the Pissing Preacher. The very fundie and Arminian Bob Jones University forbids any endorsement of Calvin's teachings, professors have been fired for not keeping their Calvinist beliefs under wraps, and students are prohibited from attending any church that espouses any Calvinist teachings.

2. The thing you hear most about in Calvinism is predestination. This is the belief that before God even created the world, He predetermined who was going to Heaven based on no knowledge of the life, choices, and decisions of the person. So it's without any merit that a person is "saved" and it's only because of the grace of God. You did absolutely nothing. There is some debate in Calvinist circles about whether or not by predetermining who was going Heaven that he predestined the rest of mankind to hell. (this is called double predestination) A lot of Calvinists don't like that idea, but it seems pretty obvious to me that predestining some to heaven and only allowing those elect folks entrance into the pearly gates, automatically means He predestined the rest to hell.

3. Calvinism is generally broken down into 5 points - TULIP. Total Depravity, Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace and Perseverance of the Saints. The main point Calvinists waver on is Limited Atonement- which is that Jesus only died for the sins of the elect and not for the sins of the world. You'll often hear these people say something like "I'm a 4 point Calvinist." Arminians tend to agree with Calvinists on Perseverance of the Saints. They almost all, with the exception of Pentecostals (I think), believe that once you're saved, you're always saved- you can't "lose" your salvation.

4. Evangelism does exist in Calvinist circles, although it's a different type of evangelism than practiced by Arminians. Calvinists try to save people in order to earn stars on their crowns in Heaven, for the glory of God on Earth, and the spread of His dominion here. Because they know that if a person is supposed to be saved they will be saved, the only thing really up for "debate" is who's going to be the person who's going to get them to that point. Arminians take a lot more personal responsibility in the destination of people's souls. They believe that if they don't witness to someone, there's a chance that person might have been saved, and because they didn't share the gospel with them, that person is now going to Hell. That's why almost all missionaries are Arminian- it's pretty rare that you'll ever find a Calvinist missionary spreading the Gospel in Africa or Outer Mongolia.

5. There has been a huge resurgence in Calvinism in the last 20 years. This is in large part due to the rise in fame of fundie-lite mega pastors like John Piper, Mark Driscoll (who named his son Calvin), Tim Keller, and groups like the Gospel Coalition- http://thegospelcoalition.org/. They have brought their sexist brand of man powered Calvinism to the masses and it's really taken off, especially in the fundie lite circles.

I have quite a few friends who are this type Calvinist and they are mostly fundie-lite except for their views on family life- which are 100% full on fundie. They are quiverfull, no BC/barriers/rhythm method, wife at home even before kids, homeschooling only, daughters can go to an approved Christian college but most come home again until married, full transfer of authority from father to husband, wives must submit to and obey their husbands in all areas, Libertarian/Tea Party. But they don't resemble the VF crowd in most everything else- they watch TV, go to secular movies, listen to regular music (as well as CCM), have individual friends (as opposed to only family group friends), and have no problem with age segregation during church. The one thing they have in common is the subjugation of their wives and daughters.

I hope this helps some!

[debrand]

Thank you punkiepie.

When I was a Christian, I hated on line debates with Calvinist, not because I found them intelligent but because they tended to be condescending and arrogant.

[Not That Kind of Dr]

The main point Calvinists waver on is Limited Atonement- which is that Jesus only died for the sins of the elect and not for the sins of the world.

Punkiepie, is this where general versus particular Baptists come in?

[bbfreethinker]

2. The thing you hear most about in Calvinism is predestination. This is the belief that before God even created the world, He predetermined who was going to Heaven based on no knowledge of the life, choices, and decisions of the person. So it's without any merit that a person is "saved" and it's only because of the grace of God. You did absolutely nothing. There is some debate in Calvinist circles about whether or not by predetermining who was going Heaven that he predestined the rest of mankind to hell. (this is called double predestination) A lot of Calvinists don't like that idea, but it seems pretty obvious to me that predestining some to heaven and only allowing those elect folks entrance into the pearly gates, automatically means He predestined the rest to hell.

Do they base this belief on anything in scripture?

[punkiepie]

Punkiepie, is this where general versus particular Baptists come in?

Well, that kind of depends... the term Baptist is used to encompass so many different groups with varying beliefs on things- and practically the only thing that keeps them even remotely united anymore is their belief in adult Baptism by submersion.

Now in terms of limited atonement- you will find that belief held by all Reformed Baptists, about half of Southern Baptist churches in the SBConvention, and about a quarter of the General Association of Regular Baptist Churches- GARBC. I think that in the next few years the SBC is going to split between the reformed group and the non-reformed group. Albert Mohler, the President of the SBC, is reformed and I think the split is going to happen sooner rather than later.

The Freewill Baptists absolutely 100% do not believe in limited atonement or any other points of Calvinism except for Perseverance of the Saints. You won't find any Calvinism in those churches.

Now Regular Baptists, Independent Baptists, Independent Fundamentalist Baptists, the other half of the SBC, and 3/4 of the GARBC, for the most part, do not believe in limited atonement- but you might find some people at these churches who do. By that I mean it's not an officially endorsed position and it's probably something rarely talked about by the preacher- but you won't be asked to leave for believing it.

In many of these Baptist churches, issues regarding Calvinism are usually seen as being more of a personal held belief and not something that needs to be taught, spread or endorsed. It's almost like a soul liberty type of thing. What that means is every individual has the freedom to choose what their conscience/soul dictates is right on matters that are not expressly written about in the Bible, ie., if you believe any kind of dancing is a sin, then it would be a sin for you to do dance. But if you don't believe it's a sin to dance, and since the Bible doesn't say it's a sin to dance, then for you, it isn't a sin

I know at my old church, which was an IFB, there were many people who were Calvinists, but they never talked about it unless asked. I think it was almost like a way to preserve the peace, keep the congregation together and not have a split. Neither side felt it was important enough to make an issue over it if it remained unspoken, and they were able to coexist.

So basically the only Baptist divisions that have hard unwavering lines on limited atonement are the Reformed Baptists (who believe in in) and the the Freewill Baptists (who do NOT). Most IFB churches and most of their congregations are full Arminians, but some are more open to Calvinistic ideas than others. Every other group is a little bit more fluid and open to varying ideas.

I hope this answered your question- if it didnt, let me know and I'll try to take another crack at it :)

[PBrooke]

5. There has been a huge resurgence in Calvinism in the last 20 years. This is in large part due to the rise in fame of fundie-lite mega pastors like John Piper, Mark Driscoll (who named his son Calvin), Tim Keller, and groups like the Gospel Coalition- http://thegospelcoalition.org/. They have brought their sexist brand of man powered Calvinism to the masses and it's really taken off, especially in the fundie lite circles.

I have quite a few friends who are this type Calvinist and they are mostly fundie-lite except for their views on family life- which are 100% full on fundie. They are quiverfull, no BC/barriers/rhythm method, wife at home even before kids, homeschooling only, daughters can go to an approved Christian college but most come home again until married, full transfer of authority from father to husband, wives must submit to and obey their husbands in all areas, Libertarian/Tea Party. But they don't resemble the VF crowd in most everything else- they watch TV, go to secular movies, listen to regular music (as well as CCM), have individual friends (as opposed to only family group friends), and have no problem with age segregation during church. The one thing they have in common is the subjugation of their wives and daughters.

I hope this helps some!

The fundie-lite type strongly reminds me of LL from vitafam. I believe the Mortons are all into Calvin as well, though I'm not sure they're actually Calvinist - but it would make sense since they're all into VF as well.

I would also argue that VF'ers totally see themselves not only as elite, but true intellectuals. I'm reminded of BB's husband, who posted pictures of "the libraries of great men" and pontificated at snooze-inducing length about some of his own books. I think Papas Smith and Morton totally see themselves as learned men. The Mortons are also majorly into their own views of history. They are very proud of the fact that they're descended from someone from the Mayflower. Look, I get it, it's neat - but I recently found out that I too am descended from a Mayflower Pilgrim. I think probably most Americans are, or someone from an equally cool period in history, But the Pilgrims were a ragtag bunch of people to begin with - just people like anyone else. I've always gotten the impression that to the Mortons, it means something more.

[punkiepie]

Do they base this belief on anything in scripture?

There are verses that "support" predestination. But there are just as many that seemingly oppose it. Many Arminians believe in conditional election, as opposed to unconditional election- which is the idea that God did choose who was going to heaven or hell, but he did so based on the foreknowledge of who would choose Him and and who wouldn't. Unconditional election means that He chose based on nothing, it was at His whim and based on nothing related in any way to the person

The most frequently used verses that support predestination are

Ephesians 1: 3-11

Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in the heavenly realms with every spiritual blessing in Christ. 4 For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love 5 he[a] predestined us for adoption to sonship through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will— 6 to the praise of his glorious grace, which he has freely given us in the One he loves. 7 In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God’s grace. that he lavished on us. With all wisdom and understanding, 9 he[d] made known to us the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure, which he purposed in Christ, 10 to be put into effect when the times reach their fulfillment—to bring unity to all things in heaven and on earth under Christ. 11 In him we were also chosen,[e] having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will

Romans 8: 29-30

For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters. 30 And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified.

Romans 9: 14-18

14 What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! 15 For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.â€[f] 16 It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy. 17 For Scripture says to Pharaoh: “I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.â€[g] 18 Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.

John 6:37 "All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out."

Verses that support the Arminian, anti-predestination perspective are:

Matt 7:7 "Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you."

John 3:16 "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."

Deuteronomy 30:19 "I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. So choose life in order that you may live, you and your descendants"

John 12:32 "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to Myself."

Titus 2:11 "For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men"