16 Comments on Is calvinism a cult?

John on Sun, 5th Jun 2005 01:56


Thank you Brian, for taking the time out to visit my blog and comment, I appreciate your encouragement!

As for calvinism being a cult, I don’t think so, although it can be very, very exclusive! But they do not deny the diety of Christ!

I am of the same ilk as you, neither a calvinist, armenian, wesleyan or any other, I am a follower of Christ, and God willing, will be till the day I die!

GBYAY

Glenn Piper on Mon, 13th Jun 2005 16:00


Surely these terms arose to differentitiate between such things as a belief in Predestination or Double Predestination and other such differences. Then like so much to do with ‘differences’ were they not then taken to extremes by people who ought to know better.
Like you I am a Christian first, foremost and above all else, but it does make it easier to use the terms Arminiaism and the like in a discussion

BA on Mon, 13th Jun 2005 18:01


Glenn,

I think you got the idea of my post. As with most of my posts I like to ask questions and get people to think about things and hopefully reference the Scripture in doing so.

I have to say though, I would be offended to be called a calvinist.

I am seeing A LOT of divisiveness and elitist mentallity coming from so called calvinists. That isn’t to say it doesn’t happen elsewhere, however, it seems to happen quite frequently with those that call themselves calvinists.

I have a lot of thoughts on such issues and I plan on posting more about it when I get some time.

In addition, I do not mind creeds, statements of faith, labels such as postmillennial, etc etc… but I have to ask, Do you really think it is “ok” to label yourself after a man or his teachings? I would venture to say that even John Calvin himself wouldn’t approve of it. An objective label is one thing, a label named after a man, which suggests being a follower of (Calvinism) is going beyond what is acceptable in my opinion.

I don’t think our Lord wants us calling ourselves anything other than Christians (followers of Christ).

AMDG

BA on Mon, 13th Jun 2005 18:36


I guess I should comment that my original post was meant to cause question. I do not consider calvinism a cult in the strict sense of the word.

In fact, most people that like to label others as arminian or calvinist would consider me a calvinist. Though I am told by some I would be a 4 point calvinist and others I would be a neo-calvinist.

One interesting thing to note about the progression of this post…
I didn’t really expect the result below, nor was the post really meant to produce the result below but…

…through the comments, I think the post has some pretty good general info on what calvinism is (for those that are asking the question at least).

pchan on Mon, 13th Jun 2005 18:44


Thanks Brian for the question. I consider myself a Calvinist and would like to try and quickly respond to the question, if I may.

The short answer is, of course, I do not believe Calvinism to be a cult at all. In fact, I believe Calvinism is simply what the Bible itself teaches.

A slightly longer (but hopefully still brief) answer is as follows:

First, a note about the use of the term “Calvinism.” Every person, group, church, or entity has a theological system, or perhaps worldview would be more apt for the non-Christian, whether or not he may care to admit it. For example, making a statement such as “I believe Jesus Christ is God” is making a theological statement about the deity of Christ. Likewise with another statement such as “I believe the Word of God is infallible” or “Salvation is by faith in Jesus Christ alone and not through the performance of works.” If we group together a series of such statements we would have a statement of beliefs or a theological system. In a broad sense, the liberal Christian’s theological system would probably exclude all of the above statements I made whereas the conservative Christian’s theological system would include them. We can get more specific, of course, so that liberal churches might differ from other liberal churches in some fine points of doctrine; conservative churches would differ too in many points of theology with one another, e.g., eschatology is hotly debated amongst conservative Christians.

Calvinism is but one such theological system, and at least from the Calvinist’s point of view, did not originate in the man John Calvin but rather from the Calvinist’s interpretation of the Bible. Other terms used in the past to describe the same system of beliefs or theological system we today call Calvinism are “Augustinianism” and “the doctrines of grace.” But essentially, all are basically the same theological system. So, at the risk of sounding like a broken record, in the Calvinist’s view, Calvinism is not the theological system of one man, John Calvin, or even a group of men, but rather what the Bible teaches. You can therefore call this system “Calvinism,” “Augustinianism,” “the doctrines of grace,” or a few other names, but in essence what the Calvinist believes is that the Bible teaches a specific theological system termed Calvinism.

Hence the real question has little if anything to do with John Calvin the man himself, but should rather be whether the theological system that goes by his name is biblical.

Another point. Some have caricatured Calvinism with misleading statements such as “Calvinism teaches that God predestines people to go to hell” or “Calvinism teaches that man has no free will,” but again these are misleading, and do not accurately convey the substance of what Calvinism espouses.

Now, I don’t want to make this post any longer than it already is, so I will simply point out the following links for you to peruse, if and as you have time:

1. The Calvinist considers himself Reformed, so he would wholeheartedly agree with the five solas of the Reformation: sola scriptura; solus Christus; sola gratia; sola fide; and soli Deo gloria. I recommend the following article:

http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/topic/fivesolas.html

2. In addition to the five solas of the Reformation, essential Calvinism would include what’s commonly referred to as TULIP:

http://www.5solas.org/media.php?id=72&print=1

3. From the lips of the great English preacher, Charles Haddon Spurgeon:

http://members.aol.com/twarren15/defense-cal.html

4. A fine sermon entitled “The Sum and Substance of All Theology” once again from Charles Haddon Spurgeon:

http://www.spurgeon.org/sermons/sum&sub.htm

5. Finally, from a hopefully more neutral or at least secular perspective (though possibly written by Calvinists; I obviously have no idea which person(s) contributed to the wiki), you can find out more about Calvinism from the following URL (warning: as a Calvinist I can’t vouch for the accuracy of this article as I would for the above articles; I only present it so that you might have another perspective on Calvinism other than the Calvinist’s):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calvinism

I hope this helps answer the question a little better. May the Lord continue to bless you.

pchan

Jeremy Pierce on Sun, 19th Jun 2005 19:03


It’s the most useful term to describe the view that many people find in the Bible but also in Augustine, to some degree Aquinas, and in some people who have had virtually no connection with Calvin (e.g. the contemporary Catholic scholar Joseph Fitzmyer). That doesn’t mean people who hold to that general outlook are seeing Calvin as their leader. It doesn’t mean they think it’s about him in any way. It’s simply the easiest way to explain that one holds to a certain view of what the scriptures teach. I accept the Calvinist line of thought. I’m a Calvinist. It’s a simple, easy way to say something that one could spend much time explaining otherwise. It doesn’t mean Calvinists are separating themselves from other Christians. It doesn’t mean they’re not fundamentally defining themselves as Christians. It doesn’t mean they won’t criticize Calvin when he was wrong (as he clearly was in many of his statements).

The reason people so fervently defend the doctrines associated with this name are because they believe the scriptures teach those doctrines quite plainly. I happen to think they’re right.

It’s worth being careful in charging others with separatism because of labels, because you may be doing the same thing. By saying that you’re not a Calvinist, you’ve thus divided yourself from them. If it’s wrong to put yourself in such categories (as you say it is), I think defining yourself negatively should be just as bad. I don’t think it’s wrong to describe your views with labels, but you’ve described your view with a label as fully as those who desacribe them with positive labels do, which means criticizing people for defining themselves according to labels other than ‘Christian’ is going to come back on you. In fact, Paul talks about this in I Corinthians. Some people divide themselves by saying they follow Paul, Apollos, or Peter. Others divide themselves by saying they aren’t in any of those groups but just follow Christ. Paul is equally opposed to that line of thought.

By the way, the Latin expression should be ’sola scriptura’. The way you have it, the adjective doesn’t agree with the noun.

BA on Sun, 19th Jun 2005 20:57


Jeremy,

I believe you are incorrect in many of your assumptions.

Believe it or not, the majority of Christians have no idea what “calvinism” is.

Therefore, I believe it does no good whatsoever to label yourself as a calvinist. The doctrine has to be explained regardless of the label. Calvinsim is actually a great example, within the calvinist camp you have neo-calvinism, hyper-calvinism, 2-5 point calvinism, internet calvinism, ugly calvinism, etc etc…basically, a sea of confusion. Not to mention that calling yourself after one’s name suggests you are a follower of said person.

I have stated many times that I have no problem with statements of faith backed by Scripture.

As far as not calling myself after a man’s name being an act of separating myself from that group…so be it. I call myself after Christ (a Christian) and Christ alone, to which every knee will bow.

The verse you are referring to is not totally applicable (in context) to the discussion here, however, that passage only strengthens my position (1 Corinthians 1:11-15). Paul is not opposed to people saying they follow Christ. Paul is opposed to division amonst Christians by saying they follow this person or that person.

AMDG

P.S. That was a typo on my part having solo instead of sola, it is corrected now, latin is not my native language.

Paul on Fri, 24th Jun 2005 02:56


You really just have to focus on the fact that Calvinism is simply apostolic Biblical doctrine. It is the hard doctrine of the Bible. This is why Calvinists are different from any and every other Christian and groups of Christians, in our manner of defense of the faith and in our manner of evangelization of the faith. We hold to apostolic Biblical doctrine. When we defend the doctrines of grace and the five solas we are defending the Bible. When we evangelize without begging or watering down doctrine we do it knowing that God’s elect merely need to hear the Word of God and they will be called. We plant the seed, but we know only God can make it grow.

You yourself use the five solas to define yourself. You need to recognize that the five solas are the basic formula of Reformation theology, fought for, defended, and died for by — mostly Calvinists. In fact, it is Calvinists who most consistently hold to the five solas. Calvin consolidated Reformation theology, and the five solas is that theology. You are able to believe in such doctrine because of the sacrifice made by Calvinists in history.

Calvinists made the sacrifice because they believed - they knew, by the Spirit of Truth in them - that the five solas are apostolic Biblical doctrine. So, you claim what was won by the sacrifice and effort of Calvinists while at the same time you mock Calvinists and Calvinism itself. Nobody would suggest you have to call yourself Calvinist, but reality is reality. At least have the understanding of the history of it all (and the real nature of what Calvinism actually is) to be grateful to Calvinists and not mock them and suggest that they follow a man or are a cult. Quite a cult it would be, by the way, if it was one… Calvin, Knox, Owen, Edwards, et al…

BA on Fri, 24th Jun 2005 10:36


Paul,

If that is directed at me, I am not mocking anyone. I am trying to drive a point though. I have a good understanding of Biblical history as well. However, I am grateful to no man, only Christ.

The terms calvinist, calvinism, etc… have developed a cult like following and also promote divisiveness among the brethren (I have seen this with my very own eyes).

Some people may think my point is dumb (that we shouldn’t be calling ourselves after a man and/or his teachings). However, I think it is a valid point. It has even been touched on in the Scripture.

AMDG

susan anderson on Tue, 5th Jul 2005 02:20


BA,

I can truly attest to your comment that Calvinism divides people. My daughter got mixed up with a hyper-calvinist family who was relentless indoctrinating her and alienating her from her family. It was her best friends family. I am her mother, and love Jesus, I attend a non denominational Bible church and have a Baptist background. These people are elitist and have destroyed my relationship with my daughter. We were very close before this happened. (I have a son and 2 other daughters). I was reading in the Bible where it talks of how anyone causing division among bretheren is an abomination to the Lord. I am heart-sick over the whole thing, but these people are cold and calculating, intellectual , and emotionless and still claiming to be Christians. I was saved when I was 10, and raised all my children in the faith, but until this happened I was not familiar with Presbyterian or Calvinist doctrine. I am now, but it is too late, it will take a miracle of God to release her mind and loyalty from these people. That is my constsnt prayer. I cringed when I hear of reformed churches, etc.

Susan Anderson

BA on Tue, 5th Jul 2005 10:23


Susan,

You don’t want to throw out “reformed” theology or churches because you ran into a “bad apple”. However, that was one of the points I was trying to make about “calvinism”. I am definitely considered reformed and I have no problems with that. I hold to the 5 solas. In addition, I would probably be considered a 4 point calvinist and maybe even a 5 point calvinist by some, but personally I don’t call myself that. Many calvinist groups and people are elitist and the doctrine, if not taught correctly, can lead people down that road. On the other side of that coin, diehard arminians attempt to mute the sovereignty of God which is a very bad thing as well.

Hopefully, your daughter will come back around and God will work in her life to restore the love that Christ wants us to have. I pray that God works in your family to accomplish this.

AMDG

Jeff Ozbirn on Wed, 1st Mar 2006 01:43


This comes from my life and my heart so please if it offends anyone I am very sorry. I do not want to judge anyone or make any false claims I just believe in the truth and that is Jesus. I have an uncle who came to know the Lord about 14 years ago. He was one fire for Jesus. He was radical in street evangilism and telling people about Jesus. He is the one who got me to go out and talk to people for the very first time(I loved it and had no greater joy). I loved his zeal and love for Jesus. He is very intelligent and reads a lot. He stumbled across john calvins teachings. Then something happened to him something I’m afraid called calvinism. You see he now is a raging alcoholic who has been kicked out of every church hes been to. He believes smoking cigars is ok because spurgeon did(who was I guess a calvinist). His mentality is if hes one of the elect then he can do what he wants and hes going to heaven anyways. He has not been to church in three years now. He’s obsessed with calvinism. He tries to brainwash my little brothers and myself into believing this doctrine. He is always talking about it, instead of talking about Jesus. He moved out of the state with his family and has lost contact with us all. He changes the word “For God so loved the world he gave his only begotten son that whosoever believes to some that believe. He thinks no church is suitable for him and his family unless it teaches calvinism. He is critical and he causes divisions and dissentions. I love him very much but to say that Christs precious holy wonderful blood only was shed for some. To say that God may send his little beautiful girl to hell according to his good pleasure, to say that is cult-like in my opinion. I think scripture is easy to understand Calvinism is not. It says in Romans God shows no partiality, well if there is limited attonment(limited blood) then isnt that being partial. Im not saying I think calvinist are going to hell but isn’t it a dangerous doctrine. I believe Christ offers his free gift to all. He loves us all so much what love is this that Calvin speaks of. Don’t most cults start from one guy or girl like Joe Smith or Mary Baker? I am worried that this is slipping into the Lords church and causing divisions. What would Paul say, better yet what would Jesus say. Its not just my uncle its many more with the mentality that they are just so special to be choosen by God where others are not so special. I guess my uncle then is one of the lucky ones. I cant however preach anything but Jesus and him crucified and resurected. To all men because I know he died for all men. Hes not a universal bully who creates you, uses you, then sends you to hell if he wishes. I’m sorry friends of Calvin I believe you are gravely mistaken about our king with your fancy words and enlightened doctrine that takes years to understand. Jesus shed his blodd for all and it is a mockery to say otherwise. I hope that those who follow the cult-like practices of John Calvin turn and follow the true practices of the Christ the Son of the most high God. I know my grammar isn’t that great and my wording might be off but please know my heart and know my intentions are not evil. I love the Lord very much and I beleive everyone has the chance to do the same. Jesus(being God) knew that Judas would betray him yet he entrusted him with the money bag, he washed his feet, and Judas sat next to him on the right side and the diciple Jesus loved was on his left. Did Jesus love John and hate Judas. No this shows that Jesus treated his enimies with the same love and respect as everyone else. almost as if he was saying Judas I love you, you dont have to do this. Not Judas I am making you do this you are a robot under my control and when I send you to hell you will think for eternity how I made you do everything and you had no hope or chance. Sorry this is not the same God that I know and love this is not Jesus sent to save everyone. I’m sure many will disagree with me but again I am sorry for offending you it is nothing personal. Thank you for your time

EFM on Thu, 28th Sep 2006 15:03


I don’t know where this is going into cyberspace but I found this forum by searching for Calvinism and Cult. Just quit a reformed church. It felt like a cult with no Sunday going by without a reference to “the elect”. I never agreed with it but thought I could stand it since we had salvation in common. However, the constant repetition and only focusing on certain scriptures which seemed to support their position wore on me. I could see people changing. I think it can turn into a cult. I think Calvinism is a serious malignment of the Character of God and shouldn’t be so easily tolerated.

Andrew on Thu, 28th Dec 2006 14:58


I have recently moved to Utah and many of the arguements I hear presented here for Calvanism

“Calvinists made the sacrifice because they believed - they knew, by the Spirit of Truth in them - that the five solas are apostolic Biblical doctrine. So, you claim what was won by the sacrifice and effort of Calvinists while at the same time you mock Calvinists and Calvinism itself. Nobody would suggest you have to call yourself Calvinist, but reality is reality. At least have the understanding of the history of it all (and the real nature of what Calvinism actually is) to be grateful to Calvinists and not mock them and suggest that they follow a man or are a cult.”

This amazes me. I am just learning about Calvanism, and their defenses sound an awful lot like the Mormon defenses I hear out here.

BA on Thu, 28th Dec 2006 23:05


Well they have points, however, they miss the big picture.

The big picture is about Christ and being a follower of Christ.

These people need to sit down and read 1 Corinthians 3.

I am grateful to Christ and Christ alone and I will call myself a Christian and nothing more. In fact, I will hold everyone who calls themselves a Christian accountable to the scripture (the Word of God).

AMDG

Jeanne on Tue, 23rd Oct 2007 11:14


One big difference between Calvinism and “Arminianism” is that there is no such thing as an “Arminian”. There are none known and called by the name of Jacob Arminius, as there are many known and called by the name of John Calvin. An “Arminian” is anyone who resists the spirit of John Calvin, whose spirit was not loving toward his enemies, as Christ’s is, and teaches us to be.

Whereas Calvinists spend their time defending the theology of John Calvin, “Arminians” spend theirs, like Jacob Arminius, defending the theology of Jesus Christ. To “Arminians”, Mr. Arminius is a brother in Christ, not the head of their church, as John Calvin is the head of his (elect).

Jesus said he needed no one to testify of man, because he knew what was in man (John 2:25) All cults who testify of their head should learn from him. But Jesus revealed also that there were plenty of men willing to receive men in their own name…and then asked them how in the world they expected to be able to believe…John 5:43,44

If John Calvin and Jesus Christ taught the same things, there would be no need to teach anything in the name of John Calvin….he would have disappeared like Philip did when he saved the Eunuch. And….they saw no man but Jesus only…Matt 17:8

Tell me what you're thinking...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!