Calvinism

John Calvin (1509-1564) was a prominent theological figure of the 16th Century in Europe.

He is best known for his “Institutes of the Christian Religion” in which he advocated a church state, imprisonment of heretics, infant baptism, and that the lost were created to go to hell. Not all Calvinists believe all these tenets. Many don’t even know he advocated them. He postulated what has become known as “Calvinism,” the doctrine of predestination. The central thesis of his teaching is that God has preselected certain individuals who will be saved and go to heaven and predetermined certain ones not selected by Him shall go to hell.

“The Westminister Confession of Faith” is the most widely held Presbyterian creed and is based on Calvinism states: “By the decree of God, for the manifestation of His glory, some men and angels are predestined to everlasting life and others are foreordained to everlasting death.” This clearly teaches God in His sovereignty chose to damn some people forever.

This is a discussion that predates Calvin. It is an issue that will always exist. The fact it does indicates God is so much greater than we that we can’t fully understand Him. Though we cannot understand Him we can know Him. Though persons disagree on the subject it need not divide them. As brothers and sisters in Christ we owe it to each other not to let it divide us. Every time it has divided a body both have suffered. No church should let the discussion become an impediment to the internal fellowship and the sharing of the gospel with the world.

In general Calvinists have some admirable traits. They believe in the inerrancy of Scripture and the substitutionary atonement of Christ, they usually live very pious lives, they hold that the purpose of everything is the glory of God, and they are clear on the fact salvation is by grace alone.

Most persons who are not Calvinists also agree on such standards. There is much to bond the two schools of thought and no reason for anything to divide the persons who differ on the subject.

Followers of strict Calvinism adhere to the theology described by the five point mnemonic acronym T-U-L-I-P.

• Total depravity of man which teaches the entire human race has fallen into a sinful state and cannot save itself. When Adam and Eve sinned humanity became incapable of seeking God.
• Unconditional election of some to salvation, which teaches some are saved only because God has chosen to save them and not because of any merit on their part.
• Limited atonement which says Christ died only for those predestined by God to be saved, not for all people. The efficacious blood of Christ is applicable only to those who are elect, the non-elect have no option but damnation.
• Irresistible grace, meaning those predestined to be saved cannot resist salvation and will eventually be brought to salvation by God. Those who are the elect MUST respond; they cannot refuse salvation.
• Perseverance of the saints which is the concept of “once saved, always saved”, meaning a person cannot loose his salvation.

Three of these concepts are in general accepted by Southern Baptist:

• Total depravity
• Unconditional election
• Perseverance of the saints.

Two are in general unacceptable to Southern Baptists:

• Limited atonement
• Irresistible grace.

Historically the latter two have lead to abandonment of evangelism. They are daggers in the heart of evangelism.

Some advocates of Calvinism point to deceased scholars such as Mullins, Connor, and Boyce as supporters of Calvinism.

I want to point to Christ and Paul.

The debate over the Sovereignty of God and the free will of man has gone on for years. I have friends who are Calvinists and some who aren’t. We are compatible not because we think alike but because we are Christians.

The issue has split many churches but need not split this one. That would disappoint our Lord.

Near Gainesville, Georgia are two churches one mile apart: Dewberry I and Dewberry II. Years ago they were one until the doctrine of Calvinism became a dispute. At an outdoor covered dish dinner one man held up a piece of fried chicken and said, “I believe I am predestined by God to eat this chicken.” Another man snatched it out of his hand and said, “I am going to eat it of my own free will.”

The church split over the issue and became Dewberry I and Dewberry II. Shades of different understanding on the issue need not split a church. However, if members insist on making it an ongoing issue it will inevitably split any church. It must not be allowed to do so.

A history of the results of what a group believes supports man’s free will. In 1814 Baptists of the U.S. divided over this issue as relates to evangelism.

The anti-evangelicals, that is hyper-Calvinists, have dwindled since that time almost to the vanishing point. The group known as Southern Baptists, who favored evangelism, have flourished.

Calvinism offers no incentive to go on mission trips, witness to the lost, visit for the church, or appeal for souls to be saved. Without such churches dwindle.

SUMMARY:

Consider these Scriptures as applied to each petal of the tulip. First, the three points generally accepted by Baptists.

TOTAL DEPRAVITY:
“All have sinned and come short of the glory of God.” Romans 3:23
“The Scripture has confined all under sin.” Galatians 3:22
“There is none righteous, no not one.”

UNCONDITIONAL ELECTION:
“For by grace are you saved and that not of yourself….” Ephesians 2:8,9

PERSEVERANCE OF THE SAINTS:
“They shall not perish but have everlasting life.”
“If they shall fall away.” Hebrews 6:4-6 The key is the case of the “if”used. It means if they could be saved and lost, if they could, but they can’t, they could not be saved again.

Now those not generally accepted by Baptists.
LIMITED ATONEMENT:
“One died for all” II Corinthians 5: 14,15
“That He might taste death for everyone” Hebrews 2:9
“Who is the Savior of all men” I Timothy 4:14
“It is not His will than any should perish…” II Peter 3:9
“Who desires that all be saved” I Timothy 2:4
“And whosoever desires, let him take the water of life freely.”  Revelation 22: 17

IRRESISTIBLE GRACE
“You stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears! You always resist the Holy Spirit; as your fathers did, so do you.”
Acts 7:51
“O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing.”  Matthew 23: 37
“Turn at my reproof; Surely I will pour out my spirit on you; I will make my words known to you. Because I have called and you refused, I have stretched out my hand and no one regarded, because you disdained all my counsel…” Proverbs 1:23,24
“He who rejects Me, and does not receive My words, has that which judges him — the word that I have spoken will judge him in the last day.” John 12:48

These verses teach a person is free to receive or reject God’s will. To do this a person must have a free will.

Calvinism makes automatons of people. An automaton is defined as a machine or control mechanism designed to follow automatically a predetermined sequence of operations or respond to encoded instructions. If man has no free will he is a puppet not a human being.

Ephesians chapters 1 and 2 teach God elected a plan of salvation and chapters 3:1 – 6:20 teaches he elected a people to propagate the plan.

Islam’s Claim To The Land Of Israel

Have you ever wondered how the Jews and Muslims both justify their claim to the same land?

Christians and Jews understand the Bible clearly identifies the land to have been given to Abraham and his descendants.

A lecture was delivered in early August in Jerusalem by an instructor in Islam explaining the “Claims of Islam on the Land of Israel.” The person lecturing defined the Muslim perspective. These are his insights.

From the Muslim view point the Koran came directly from Allah. According to non-Muslim scholars the Koran is written from a desert mentality with little reference to geography.

Muslims believe conflicting Bible texts are simply misunderstood by Christians and Jews. The lecturer stated, “I am bringing to you facts without expressing my own convictions.”

They believe the land being contested was “given by Allah to the Sons of Israel.” They content the Jews of today cannot be identified with the Israelites of the Old Testament. Muslims believe they are the true Israelites. Muslim, not Christian, names for the land are “the Holy Land” or “the Blessed Land.”

To lay further claim to the land they say any land where Muslim blood has been shed is Muslim land. Thus, the Holy Land is Muslim land. They are committed to possessing all such lands. This they say is the will of Allah.

Abraham is claimed by them to be the first Muslim. It was Ishmael not Isaac Abraham was willing to offer not in Jerusalem but somewhere near Mecca according to the Hadith. Abraham did not argue with or question God. Therefore, the Word and Will or Allah is not to be discussed or questioned just stated and obeyed.

They believe Issa, their name for Jesus, was a great Muslim prophet. According to their beliefs He is the only prophet who will come back at the end of days.

There are two primary Muslim bodies. El Qaeda is a Sunni movement. The Shiite movement is represented by Hezbollah and is centered in and controlled by Iran. The two groups hate each other and that is the reason for the insurgency in Iraq. The only thing they have in common is a desire to establish Islam in all the world. To the Sunni the Shiite countries have been corrupted by the West.

To Ben Ladin, who is a Sunni, the only good Shiite is a dead Shiite. The only thing binding them is a shared hatred for Israel and the West.

The Shiite believe they are the underdogs who have been mistreated, made to suffer, and be martyred. This enables them to relate to those who suffer. They believe they will continue to suffer until their Imam reappears to lead an apocalyptic war to establish justice and peace. Interpreted that means world conquest by Islam.

Our western mentality has a difficult time comprehending a youth happily strapping a bomb on his body and joyously blowing himself up to kill a few people. They rejoice to die for Allah and a better after-life. Such is the dedication of millions of Muslims. That is the resolve we face. Is anybody listening.

All of these principles stated to be believed by Muslims come from a lecture recently delivered in Jerusalem by an instructor in Islam.

Our Right To Know

In 1450 BC a colony was established on the lovely Island of Rhodes in the Aegean Sea. It flourished and developed into a major trade and cultural center. Over the years its industrious inhabitants and natural terrain made it a viable military fortification. Its massive walls made it at times virtually invulnerable. One siege led to the frustration of its attackers. Disheartened they were on the verge of withdrawing and would have were it not for an arrow shot over the walls from within with a note attached.

The note revealed the besieged city was on the verge of collapsing from within because of a lack of munitions and food. Encouraged by the note and subsequent ones coming from the betrayer they extended their siege which resulted in the conquest of the city. A betrayer from within caused the defeat of the great walled city of Rhodes.

Antioch in ancient Turkey turned away would be invaders. The siege of the city took a dramatic turn when an armor maker who had command of three towers betrayed his fellow citizens. For a price he arranged for the invaders to gain access to the city through his three towers. Having breached the walls they opened the city gates for a flood tide of invaders who quickly conquered the city that felt secure within its fortified walls.

“The New York Times” cradled in the comfort of a free society and protected by an army of valiant young Americans under the guise of the public’s right to know divulged a technique used by our government to track and capture terrorists. Like the people of Rhodes and Antioch we American citizens have been betrayed by a government informer and an insensitive press.

Did the public have a right to know the date of the Normandy invasion? Was there an inherent right for the public to be informed as to what was being developed in Oak Ridge in the early 1940s? That was an era of patriotism when members of the press had a sense of responsibility. A prominent slogan encouraging not divulging sensitive information read: “A slip of a lip might sink a ship.”

Somewhere along the line we have lost the distinction between a right and a responsibility. Though there might be a right to yell fire in a crowded building there is a responsibility not to do it if there is no fire.

“The New York Times” might show in a court of law they had the right to disclose the information regarding tracking terrorists by their financial transactions. It is elementally obvious they had the responsibility not to. In doing so they achieved two ends. They placed Americans at risk and aided the terrorists.

On a personal level there is an admonition to “speak the truth in love.” There are times love prompts us not to speak even the truth. That is not an encouragement to deceive. It is an appeal not to divulge hurtful truth if it is known to be injurious and of no benefit. That same principle needs to be employed by the press. I don’t know what motivated “The New York Times” but it wasn’t love for the American people.

Hezbollah In Our Midst

Let’s start with a disclaimer. Not all Baptists are alike. There is the understatement of the year. Against the reality of that background it is time we acknowledge not all Muslims are alike. Some want to live peacefully with non-Muslims.

There are over one billion Muslims. A significantly large number of them are blood thirsty and believe they are doing the will of Allah in trying to institute Islam globally. These jihadists are willing to go to apocalyptic extremes to bring all people into the Muslim fold and exclude all other religions.

There are several terrorist groups dedicated to this end with the backing of their religious leaders. Hizbollah in Lebanon, al-Qaeda in Iraq and Hamas in Gaza, are three. Only the naive believe the first two are restricted to the countries listed. One million Muslims were seen demonstrating in the streets of Beirut in support of Hizbollah.

For some reason the large demonstrations by Muslims supporting Hizbollah in Los Angeles, Chicago, and Detroit were rarely seen on American TV. We failed to realize an elemental fact when we went into Iraq. Two factions of Islam, Shias and Sunnis, have battled each other there for nearly 1200 years.

When we leave they will start again. Iraqi Prime Minister Al-Maliki, elected by a democratic process, is a Shia. He is having to battle the Sunni insurgency. The groups have battled for centuries. One thing they have in common is a desire for Iraq and the world to be a theocracy with Allah as “Theo.”

Shias and Sunnis fight because of a riff that occurred upon the death of Muhammad. Shias thought leadership of the movement should go to Muhammad’s son-in-law, Ali, who was married to Fatima the daughter of Muhammad.

Abu Bakr, Muhammad’s confidant was chosen as the first Caliph to headed the Sunni branch. Sunnis constitute 85% to 90% of the world’s Muslim population. They are divided into four major schools of law, “Shari’ah,” the Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi, and Hanbali. Each is named for the founder of their school of law.

The division between the two groups has widened to include such things as the role of oral tradition (Sunna) in interpreting the Qur’an.

All Muslim extremists have the same objective in mind. It is to make Islam the world’s religion to the exclusion of all others. All others, such as Christians and Jews, are considered infidels.

Fundamentalist Muslims divide the world into two categories. Dar El Islam, the House of Islam, consists of those countries under Islamic control. Dar El Harb, the House of War, is comprised of countries not under Islamic control.

Radical Muslims believe they are under a mandate from Allah to bring all nations into Dar El Islam. To do this they have three alternatives as to how to deal with non-Muslims: conquer and tax them, convert them, or kill them.

There are 129 war verses in the Qur’an that many Muslims interpret as legitimizing any means, even 9-11, to achieve this end.

Our best, and perhaps only way to win the war against terrorism, is to encourage the peace loving element of Islam to the extent they bring rational influences within their society that calm the world conquest passion. There are verses in the Qur’an that would support their effort.

America’s War Dead

We are each diminished by the death of any of our military personnel. Abhorrence for war, which we all share, has led some to become critical of what many feel is an essential military struggle against terrorism. We don’t want it but it won’t go away by itself.

Our grievous casualties were put into perspective for me by research done by a friend, Pat Adams.

Since the beginning of the Afghanistan War (10/01) there have been 295 US Military casualties.

Since the beginning of the Iraq War (3/19/03) there have been over 2,500 US Military deaths.

That totals more that 2,795 reasons to sorrow.

However, contrast that with what we have grown to tolerate in the United States.

From 2003 to 2005, drunk driving deaths in the US totaled 50,771.

During that same period the murders in New York City and Los Angeles totaled 3,184.

The total number of murders in America in those years was 49,577.

A breakdown shows an American Military member would be 1.3 times more likely to be killed walking the streets of New York or Los Angeles than patrolling a street in Iraq or Afghanistan.

A member of our military would be 18.2 times more likely to be killed driving on the streets in the United States than driving on the streets of Iraq or Afghanistan.

A member of our military is 17.7 times more likely to be murdered inside the United States than killed inside the boundaries of Iraq or Afghanistan.

This is no attempt to rationalize or minimize the war deaths. It does put into perspective the dramatic deaths tolerated in America.

A Palestinian youth in Israel being aware of the murder climate in New York asked me why our military doesn’t invade New York and establish peace there before going to Iraq. That is the mentality among many in the Arab world.

The Nazi invasion of the neighbors of Germany inevitably started World War II. What is now happening globally is the precursor to World War III.

Not all of the one billion Muslims are committed to this war. Many prefer peace. However, it is estimated there are over 5,000,000 radicals jihadists aligned against us. Scores of these want to be martyred in our destruction. They are anxious to die for Islam in a fight against those of us they consider infidels. Islam can win this war. That is not to say they will prevail militarily.

There is another hopeful outcome in which Islam prevails. In a different era when Islam was engaged in world conquest a rational element within realized their blood lust was not good for their countries. This rational element cooled their ambitions of conquest and aggression ceased. Such an element in the Muslim world needs to be encouraged. It is there. Let’s hope they win.