Calvinists disguise and carefully choose words to state what they believe--this has always been a concern for me.

           "Calvinists" are not disguising anything, it is the non-Calvinists that is...I will elaborate more on that a bit later.  In terms of carefully choosing words to state what we believe, I’d like to make two points:

First, we have found this necessary because of the many misconceptions and misunderstandings that people have with regard to what we believe.  A lot of this has to do with the acrostic TULIP.  The acrostic, which was devised to be an aide to help people remember the main points of defense of orthodox Protestant Reformed theology against the Arminian view, can be more trouble than it's worth. The reason many of us don’t care for the acrostic is because the terms are given to a tremendous amount of misunderstanding. Very often people think they have an idea of what Reformed people believe based on the words of the acrostic themselves (i.e., Total Depravity, Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace, Perseverance of the Saints).  They then base all of their objections to the view on their misunderstanding of those particular words in the acrostic.  In other words, very often they never deal with what is taught within in each point.  All they do is hear the words “Limited Atonement” or “Irresistible Grace” and then attack those words instead of what is really being taught by those words.  Thus, we are trying to clarify what we believe and why we believe it.  The sad thing is, even after we do that, we find people who simply refuse to listen, and continue with the same misguided misrepresentations.   Dave Hunt is a classic example:  What Love Is This

            Secondly, I’m not certain what the problem would be here with choosing our words carefully in stating what we believe.  The concern should be for those who choose their words recklessly in stating what they believe.  Every writer of Scripture in the Bible chose their words carefully (under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit of course), and it is clear that the early church fathers did that as well as we read the early Church statements of faith that were forged in the face of growing heresy.  They simply could not afford to be imprecise with such important matters as Biblical truth.  The church was forced then, and is forced now, to be as precise and careful in stating its beliefs, lest the enemy come in and distort doctrine, and ravage the sheep.  The reason the church has been so undermined in recent years is for this very reason.  Imprecision in theology has led to the church being tossed to and fro by every wind of doctrine (see False Teachers).  

            I would also add that to be careless in the statement of what we believe is to be careless in our handling of the Bible, and to be careless in our handling of the Bible is simply inexcusable.  I believe that this largely accounts for why so many in the Evangelical church are confused about these very issues.  Preachers have been so imprecise from the pulpit concerning the very nature of the Gospel as to make the Bible itself one massive volume of contradictory nonsense.  They want to affirm a sovereign, omnipotent God, while at the same time maintain that God can't do anything unless man lets Him!    Is there anything more absurd than that?!  And yet, that is "boldly" proclaimed from the majority of so-called Evangelical pulpits today.  I would argue that it is they, not us, who are disguising what they are saying.  They want to proclaim that God is in control, and that nothing can thwart His will and purposes, but that is merely a disguise for what really lurks beneath:  a purely humanistic philosophy that makes man's "free will" decision the measure of all things, and has God on the outside, helplessly looking in while His supposedly sovereign will and purposes are indeed thwarted over and over again.    

Home

Hosted by www.Geocities.ws

1