Fundamentalists Also Turning To Calvinism ??

[BBAS 64]

Good Day,

David Cloud shares on his site:


FUNDAMENTALISTS ALSO TURNING TO CALVINISM (Friday Church News Notes, September 29, 2006, www.wayoflife.org (http://www.wayoflife.org/) fbns@wayoflife.org (fbns@wayoflife.org), 866-295-4143) - A few years ago I visited the Bob Jones University bookstore and was amazed at the large number of volumes that were available on Puritanism. I thought to myself at the time that this probably signifies that many BJU teachers and graduates are being influenced by PuritanismÕs Reformed theology. Since then I have seen growing evidence of this. I know of formerly non-Calvinist Baptist churches that have become Calvinistic after BJU graduates were called to the pastorate. On a recent trip to Australia I was shown a publication (ÒWhy Read the Puritans TodayÓ) that was sent out to an independent Baptist mailing list by a BJ graduate. The booklet lists 10 reasons for the renewed interest in Puritanism. The recommendation was not accompanied by any warning about Reformed theology and its attendant Calvinism and Amillennialism. I donÕt know if this BJ grad is a Calvinist, but he is certainly helping to promote Calvinism with this type of thing. And this is not something limited to those associated with Bob Jones. In 2005 an extensive survey was done of Òyoung fundamentalists.Ó Entitled ÒYoung FundamentalistsÕ Beliefs and Personal Life,Ó the survey results are available online at http://www.sharperiron.org/downloads/2005%20Young%20Fundamentalists%20Survey%20Results.pdf (http://www.sharperiron.org/downloads/2005%20Young%20Fundamentalists%20Survey%20Results.pdf). For the purposes of the survey, a Òyoung fundamentalistÓ is one who is under 35 years old. The survey contained 135 questions pertaining to life and doctrine, and roughly 1,100 surveys were completed. The vast majority of respondents identified themselves with three fundamentalist schools: Bob Jones University (29%), Maranatha Baptist Bible College (22%), and Northland Baptist Bible College (21%). When it comes to Calvinist views, an amazing 58% of the respondents hold a Calvinist view of sovereign election, with another 8% unsure. THUS ONLY ABOUT 35% OF THE RESPONDENTS TO THE FUNDAMENTALIST SURVEY REJECT CALVINISM. Some 14% of the respondents hold to either amillennial (8%) or postmillennial (5%) views, which goes hand in hand with Reformed theology. I believe we will see this percentage increase in coming days, with a growing rejection of the pre-millennial, pre-tribulation position. The chief culprit in the growth of Calvinism is literature. John Piper and John MacArthur are popular among fundamentalists. The Puritan literature is also increasing dramatically, as previously noted. On a recent trip to England I had a nice visit with Dr. Peter Masters at Metropolitan Tabernacle. He graciously showed me the various artifacts associated with previous esteemed pastors, particularly Charles Spurgeon and John Gill. Dr. Masters told me that visiting preachers often like to sit in GillÕs chair, which is located in a hallway outside of MastersÕ office; but I told him that I would be afraid that I might catch GillÕs Calvinism! I admire a great many things about Spurgeon and the Puritans and many modern-day Calvinists, as well, but I vehemently disagree with Reformed theology. (I reject the Quick Prayerism scheme that is so prevalent among independent Baptists just as vehemently. In fact, I have no doubt that the unscripturalness of this popular evangelistic program and the doctrinal shallowness of many independent Baptist churches and schools has caused some to fall into the arms of Calvinism and its more intellectual approach.) Having studied the Bible earnestly and prayerfully for 33 years and having studied both sides of this issue, I am convinced that neither Calvinism nor Quick Prayerism is Scriptural. I have no ill will toward those who differ, but here I must stand, and I believe it is an issue worth standing for.

http://wayoflife.org/fbns/fridaynews/news/2006/fridaynews060929.html

How has this issue impacted your local church?

Are his insights true, based on your own life?



Peace to u,

Bill

[tamtam92]

*** off-subject -- i don't view it like bad news ;) ***

I'd say it can be true... i've heard recently of a man who was leaning towards calvinism after his studies in the US.

As the author of the article, i hope it won't hinder evangelism. Yet personnally i'm nearer to calvinism than to arminianism (i'd say 80-20). But here in France our background is different.

Let's see what will be the outcome of it...

[arunma]

*** off-subject -- i don't view it like bad news ;) ***

I'd say it can be true... i've heard recently of a man who was leaning towards calvinism after his studies in the US.

As the author of the article, i hope it won't hinder evangelism. Yet personnally i'm nearer to calvinism than to arminianism (i'd say 80-20). But here in France our background is different.

Let's see what will be the outcome of it...

Est-ce que vous êtes une Hugoenot?

[arunma]

Just one comment. I'm not sure that the Reformed movement would be characterized as "fundamentalist," per se. For example, one of the persons mentioned in the OP, namely John Piper, is the pastor of my church. We aren't fundamentalist, though we are orthodox in doctrine (which is why I hang around this forum anyway). Depending on one's understanding of fundamentalism, one might be surprised that most of the churches listed here don't believe the things that you'd expect. For example, it's hard to imagine a Reformed church that's KJV-only (although such churches do exist...somewhere).

[DiscipleOfIAm]

Being an independent fundamental church, it hasn't affected my church. We still do not follow Clavinist teachings.

I can see where some churches, who may end up Pastor worshippers, would follow whatever their pastor taught. If this is the case where Cloud states graduates of BJU are bringing this to the churches.

The church I attend, however, stresses that each member read their Bible and cross check facts themselves to ensure they are following God's teachings. The pastor does not want to be worshipped and for the congregation to blindly believe and follow him. Blindly being the keyword there.

God Bless!

[No Swansong]

Well according to the definition we use on this forum, I see no reason those who hold to Reformed Theology cannot be considered Fundamentalist. For that matter however so can those who hold to an Arminian doctrine.
I am not sure that I agree that a greater degree of Reformed Theology hurts evangelism though. Most of those I have met who are reformed are very interested in and active in evangelism.

[arunma]

I am not sure that I agree that a greater degree of Reformed Theology hurts evangelism though. Most of those I have met who are reformed are very interested in and active in evangelism.

Here's one Reformed Christian who thinks that evangelism is the primary duty of the church.

[GrinningDwarf]

The church I attend, however, stresses that each member read their Bible and cross check facts themselves to ensure they are following God's teachings.

Funny...that's what I did...and wound up a Calvinist! :thumbsup:

[TwinCrier]

Funny...that's what I did...and wound up a Calvinist! :thumbsup:Huh, funny, I thought that the basis of Calvinism is that you cannot seek anything to believe. I figure if Calvinism is true, God elected for me NOT to believe in most of the aspects of the tulip, so what can I say? But just incase I do have a free will, I'll put my faith in the sacrifice of Jesus.

And for the record, I would hope that Calvinists would NOT post here as I feel this is one of the few forums I can truly commune with like minded people. I wouldn't dream of joining the Reformed forum and try to justify myself into their ranks.

[No Swansong]

Huh, funny, I thought that the basis of Calvinism is that you cannot seek anything to believe. I figure if Calvinism is true, God elected for me NOT to believe in most of the aspects of the tulip, so what can I say? But just incase I do have a free will, I'll put my faith in the sacrifice of Jesus.

And for the record, I would hope that Calvinists would NOT post here as I feel this is one of the few forums I can truly commune with like minded people. I wouldn't dream of joining the Reformed forum and try to justify myself into their ranks.


It doesn't really come up here much though does it? I would be willing to bet that some of those who post here are Calvinists. We just don't seem to discuss it much as it really isn't important to the things that we do discuss.

With that said I hope nobody takes this as an invitation to start debating Calvinism and Arminianism here. While such a debate is within what is permissable I would just as soon it not happen.

[arunma]

And for the record, I would hope that Calvinists would NOT post here as I feel this is one of the few forums I can truly commune with like minded people. I wouldn't dream of joining the Reformed forum and try to justify myself into their ranks.

To be honest, I've never figured out what my place is on this forum. I'm not a fundamentalist, to be sure. But I happen to believe in virtually all of the same things as them. Non-fundamentalists are only allowed to make fellowship or inquiry posts, and fundamentalists are allowed to engage in any discussion. I try to keep my posts somewhere in between those two extremes.

[GrinningDwarf]

And for the record, I would hope that Calvinists would NOT post here as I feel this is one of the few forums I can truly commune with like minded people. I wouldn't dream of joining the Reformed forum and try to justify myself into their ranks.

My apologies. The only reason I wandered in was because I saw the thread title "Fundamentalists Also Turning to Calvinism?" on the Congregation page. I didn't know what forum it was in.

[BBAS 64]

Being an independent fundamental church, it hasn't affected my church. We still do not follow Clavinist teachings.

I can see where some churches, who may end up Pastor worshippers, would follow whatever their pastor taught. If this is the case where Cloud states graduates of BJU are bringing this to the churches.

The church I attend, however, stresses that each member read their Bible and cross check facts themselves to ensure they are following God's teachings. The pastor does not want to be worshipped and for the congregation to blindly believe and follow him. Blindly being the keyword there.

God Bless!

Good Day, DiscipleOfIAm

In my Fundy Indep. Baptist Church, we do the same thing and are incorouaged to check the facts. There are a couple of Calvinist in our membership it really makes for interesting sunday school time.

Peace to u,

Bill

[tamtam92]

And what about being in-between? The Bible holds both calvinist and arminian teachings i think.

I'm not sure whether i'm a fundamentalist. I take the Bible literally and try to live by it. Is that OK? ;)
I don't care so much about being calvinist or arminian -- but i think being an extremist of one or the other isn't very sane. Personnally i don't think i had much choice when i choosed Christ (does that make sense?).

As for my church's origin... i would have to enquire more to explain. But i think we are from the first french evangelical baptist churches. We've been independant from the beginning (1903). So i'm not a "huguenote", though i can relate to them in many aspects (those of the past rather than those of nowadays).

[DiscipleOfIAm]

Good Day, DiscipleOfIAm

In my Fundy Indep. Baptist Church, we do the same thing and are incorouaged to check the facts. There are a couple of Calvinist in our membership it really makes for interesting sunday school time.

Peace to u,

Bill

:D I bet that does make for a fun time at SS class!

[BBAS 64]

Huh, funny, I thought that the basis of Calvinism is that you cannot seek anything to believe. I figure if Calvinism is true, God elected for me NOT to believe in most of the aspects of the tulip, so what can I say? But just incase I do have a free will, I'll put my faith in the sacrifice of Jesus.

And for the record, I would hope that Calvinists would NOT post here as I feel this is one of the few forums I can truly commune with like minded people. I wouldn't dream of joining the Reformed forum and try to justify myself into their ranks.

Good day, Twin

"I thought that the basis of Calvinism is that you cannot seek anything to believe."

From where or whom did you get this idea?

Please feel free to come on over to the reformed Forum when you have a question you need answered, the water is cold and the M&M's are plain and peanut.

IN Him,

Bill

[cajunhillbilly]

If you read the Fundamentals of the Faith, the series of books that gave Fundamentalism its name, you would be surprised to find out that most of the authors that contributed articles were strong Calvinists and amillenial or even postmil in eschatology. People are so ignorent of history today.

[cubanito]

Fundamentalism, as defined in this forum, is a category that includes charismatics, non-charismatics, Reformed Presbys, Lutheran, Freewill Baptist, Reformed (Calvinist) Baptists and even the odd fully commited Calvarminian Progressive Dispensationalist like myself that dosen't fit anywhere. or my RC wife who, despite her allegiance to Rome on a few matters, cares little for the Pope's opinion, and holds to al the Reformation solas. McCarthur, cited in the article is as much a premillenial Dispensationalist as a devotee of the TULIP.

Fundamentalism is a very useful category because it excludes anyone who does not have an extremely high view of Biblical authority. However, it is not directly concerned with many theological positions beyond the belief in the supreme and undiluted authority of the Bible. Like it or not, the Bible speaks very clearly on a number of matters, but not so clearly about others. The exact meaning of the Eucharist, the timing and modality of baptism, and the whole TULIP vs man's "freewill" are such matters. It excludes many people who, while they may be Christian (or not), I have little in common with. I frankly do not understand where most non-fundamentalist Christians gets their ideas, as they have rejected the Written Word of God as a guide. Herin lie the majority of Unitarians, Methodists, and virtually all other "liberals."

Personally I hold that BOTH the full TULIP (Calvinian) view of the Sovereignty of God AND the freedom of man to accept or reject the Gospel are true. It is the applicability of human reasoning to limit God that I reject. But I refuse to debate that on this thread, I only bring it up to show just how pretzel-complicated and nuanced different views can be and yet be fully Fundamentalist. Oh well, c'est la mort, mais por moi, LE Vie (gender intended).

Fundamentalist is like saying "the category of things that are red on the outside." Some apples, cakes, and some cars are red. Calvinism is like saying "sweet tasting things." These are categories that are neither exclusive nor necessary. They are altogether different.

Well guys, my computer room is having the ceiling taken down, so computer contact may get spotty again.
JR

[No Swansong]

Fundamentalism, as defined in this forum, is a category that includes charismatics, non-charismatics, Reformed Presbys, Lutheran, Freewill Baptist, Reformed (Calvinist) Baptists and even the odd fully commited Calvarminian Progressive Dispensationalist like myself that dosen't fit anywhere. or my RC wife who, despite her allegiance to Rome on a few matters, cares little for the Pope's opinion, and holds to al the Reformation solas. McCarthur, cited in the article is as much a premillenial Dispensationalist as a devotee of the TULIP.

Fundamentalism is a very useful category because it excludes anyone who does not have an extremely high view of Biblical authority. However, it is not directly concerned with many theological positions beyond the belief in the supreme and undiluted authority of the Bible. Like it or not, the Bible speaks very clearly on a number of matters, but not so clearly about others. The exact meaning of the Eucharist, the timing and modality of baptism, and the whole TULIP vs man's "freewill" are such matters. It excludes many people who, while they may be Christian (or not), I have little in common with. I frankly do not understand where most non-fundamentalist Christians gets their ideas, as they have rejected the Written Word of God as a guide. Herin lie the majority of Unitarians, Methodists, and virtually all other "liberals."

Personally I hold that BOTH the full TULIP (Calvinian) view of the Sovereignty of God AND the freedom of man to accept or reject the Gospel are true. It is the applicability of human reasoning to limit God that I reject. But I refuse to debate that on this thread, I only bring it up to show just how pretzel-complicated and nuanced different views can be and yet be fully Fundamentalist. Oh well, c'est la mort, mais por moi, LE Vie (gender intended).

Fundamentalist is like saying "the category of things that are red on the outside." Some apples, cakes, and some cars are red. Calvinism is like saying "sweet tasting things." These are categories that are neither exclusive nor necessary. They are altogether different.

Well guys, my computer room is having the ceiling taken down, so computer contact may get spotty again.
JR


What is interesting is that my son would agree with everything you posted here. (If you knew my son you would know why that is interesting)

[cubanito]

To be honest, I've never figured out what my place is on this forum. I'm not a fundamentalist, to be sure. But I happen to believe in virtually all of the same things as them. Non-fundamentalists are only allowed to make fellowship or inquiry posts, and fundamentalists are allowed to engage in any discussion. I try to keep my posts somewhere in between those two extremes.
Arumna, your placein this forum is to be my troll. I've even got you voting Rep this time around :thumbsup:

JR