Over the years I have read and heard quite a bit about the Baptists'
long standing doctrinal identification with the "Five Points of
Calvinism." In much the same manner that our folks call those who
identify with the doctrines expounded by Jacobus Arminius "Arminians,"
other religious orders (and even some of our own people) refer to the
Old School Baptists as "Calvinists." As a matter of fact, some have even
now gone so far as to label those of us who believe in the absolute
sovereignty and Divine government of God Almighty as "hyper-Calvinists."
I respectfully submit that I am not a Calvinist of any stripe, and I
would like to explain my reasons.
Let me begin by giving an honest answer to a fair question. Do I
personally agree with what are called the "Five Points of Calvinism," or
the "TULIP doctrine"? Yes, I do, because they do advocate - in the letter,
at least - some important truths taught in the Bible, Viz: Total
depravity, Unconditional election, Limited atonement, Irresistible
grace, Preservation and Perseverance of God's elect. Do I believe that
the Old School Primitive Baptists are somehow indebted to him because he
was (presumably) such an articulate exponent of some of the principal
doctrines we hold? No, I do not, because what we believe was not taught us by John Calvin. We have had the same teacher, and have been taught in the very same manner, as the Apostle Paul.
"But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of
[by] me is not after man. For I neither received it of man, neither was I
taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ (Gal. 1:11-12)."
Do I hold any particular regard for the memory of John Calvin because
he believed some of the doctrines taught in the Bible? No, I can't
honestly say that I do. The sketch of Calvin's life and ministry
reprinted above clearly precludes any such veneration. Insofar as I am
aware, he left no record of repentance toward God for persecuting many
of His dear people, unlike the Apostle Paul and some others. Let us
carefully consider some teachings of the Lord Jesus which have
particular relevance to the public career of John Calvin.
"And it came to pass, when the time was come that he should be
received up, he stedfastly set his face to go to Jerusalem, And sent
messengers before his face: and they went, and entered into a village of
the Samaritans, to make ready for him. And they did not receive him,
because his face was as though he would go to Jerusalem. And when his
disciples James and John saw this, they said, Lord, wilt thou that we
command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them, even as Elias
[Elijah] did? But he turned, and rebuked them, and said, Ye know not
what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them. And they went to another village (Luke 9:51-56)."
I have never read Calvin's much-praised "Institutes of the Christian
Religion," although I have known about it for several years. I did try
one time, at the request of a dear friend, to read his commentary on the
Book of Ephesians, but it was so spiritually lifeless and so filled
with redundant phrases that I finally gave up and laid it aside
unfinished. To me, at least, it simply was not edifying.
That John Calvin was an intellectually brilliant man, no fair-minded
critic would be likely to deny. That he felt a passionate zeal for the
holiness of God is likewise admitted. Unfortunately, like many of his
ancient brethren whom we read about in the New Testament, his zeal was
almost totally devoid of any real knowledge of the true character of God
(Who is "rich in mercy," for example). From what source he received his
assumed confidence to be a righteous judge of his fellow creatures I
will not presume to say.
Would to God he had been endued with the spirit of the poet who wrote the following sentiments:
"When thou, my righteous Judge, shall come,
To fetch thy ransomed people home,
Shall I among them stand?
Shall such a worthless worm as I,
Who sometimes am afraid to die,
Be found at thy right hand?"
Personal morality is most assuredly a good thing, and is a fairly accurate mark of sound character; but morality is not religion. [It is, of course, one of true religion's effects.]
It is quite likely that at least some atheists and infidels are
individuals with sound morals, but that fact has no bearing on their
true standing before God. As the reader is well aware, the real test of
true religion is found in the following words of our dear Lord: "What think ye of Christ? whose son is he?.. .(Matt. 22:42)."
John Calvin's record, in contrast to his rhetoric, clearly speaks for
itself. Though he is commonly believed to be an exponent of God's
sovereign grace, he was an uncompromising practitioner of Old Covenant
religion. Evidently, he was not blessed to understand that the conscience is the bar before which a man's religion is to be tried in this world. Ultimately, Christ Jesus the Lord is the true Righteous Judge who "shall reward every man according to his works (Matt. 16:27)." See also Acts 17:31.
"But why dost thou judge brother? or why
dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all [with no
exceptions] stand before the judgment seat of Christ. For it is written,
As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue
shall confess to God. So then every one of us shall give account of
himself to God (Rom. 14:10-12)."
It goes almost without saying that, when that time comes, no amount
or kind of legal - or fleshly - righteousness will clear any man of his
guilt before God. The only hope any poor sinner will have then is his personal faith in the atoning blood and the imputed righteousness of Jesus Christ the Savior.
To be a "Calvinist" necessarily implies that one is a disciple, or
follower, of John Calvin and/or his teaching. But the word of the Lord does not allow for God's dear children to be such.
"Be ye therefore followers of God, as dear children; And walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us, and hath given himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet-smelling savour (Eph. 5:1-2)."
"Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me (Matt. 16:24)."
"For ye [Corinthians] are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men? For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; [and later, some would say, I am of Calvin;] are ye not carnal? Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man? I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase. So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase (1 Cor. 3:3-7)."
Thus: "Therefore let no man glory in men. For all things are yours; Whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, or the world, or life, or death, or things present, or things to come; all are yours; And are Christ's and Christ is God's (1 Cor. 3:21-23)."
Well, then, if it is not proper to call the Lord's followers
"Calvinists," by what name should they be called? What about being
called by "the name which is above every name"? What could possibly be
wrong with that? "There is no scriptural precedent for doing that," you
say? Mark! "Then departed Barnabas to Tarsus for to seek Saul (Paul):
And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to
pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and
taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch (Acts 11:25-26)."
Years later, when Paul preached the gospel in the presence of King
Herod Agrippa, the king admitted that "Almost thou persuadest me to be a
Christian." And, what was Paul's response? "And Paul said, I would to
God, that not only thou, but also all that hear me this day were both almost, and altogether such as I am, except these bonds (Acts 26:29)."
So, Paul did not disdain being identified as a Christian, which
simply means "a follower of Jesus Christ," and neither did his fellow
apostle, Simon Peter. "Yet if any man suffer as a Christian, let him not
be ashamed; but let him glorify God on this behalf [for this very
reason] (1 Peter 4:16)."
Because I know the reasons behind it, I have no problem with being
called "an Old Hardshell Primitive Baptist." That term has no tendency
to glorify men. But I do not care to be called, or identified, as a
"Calvinist" because that designation does not fit.
However feeble and halting my steps may be, like Joshua of old, I
desire to follow after and serve the Lord, and no one else. To Him alone
may glory and honor be.
No comments:
Post a Comment