And I’m in good company!
In a Friday the 13th chapel message outlining the “Message, Mission and Vision” of Liberty, Dr. Falwell said many things I would agree with, to be sure. However, Tom Ascol notes he then said something that I would not agree with:
“We are not into partcular love or limited atonement. As a matter of fact we consider it heresy.”
I think Tom Ascol’s comments are pretty good, so here are some:
“What I regret is that he finds particular atonement to be “heresy.” This must mean that he and Liberty believe that those who hold to particular atonement to be heretics. Among the countless numbers of people whom he would brand with the H-word are many who would make any evangelical Who’s who list (including Bunyan, Owen, Whitefield, Spurgeon, Carey, Boyce, Mell, Dagg and Lloyd-Jones, to name but a few of the dead ones). I find this sad.
“Does Jerry Falwell and Liberty University really judge John Piper to be a heretic? If we take his words seriously, as surely we ought if we are to honor him, then he believes that Al Mohler, R.C. Sproul, John MacArthur, D. James Kennedy, Ligon Duncan, Mark Dever, Tom Nettles, Wayne Grudem, Sinclair Ferguson, James White and Fred Malone teach heresy.”
I was once called apostate for not believing that they King James Version, authorized by a Catholic English King to be standard Bible for the Church of England and translated from what are currently inferior texts, is not the only translation a Christian may use by a Catholic-hating, independent fundamentalist (ah, the irony). And now I am a heretic. Well, actually Dave Hunt called “me” one by denouncing Calvinism as heretical.
The late John Gerstner, known for an inflammatory comment or 2, had nothing on this type of reasoning. I wonder what this will cost Falwell. This is far more serious than mischaracterizing a women’s basketball team. Oh yeah, pretty much nothing but some fundraising cash.
Jerry, you may condemn me but you’re still my brother.
Cavman Considers 
count me in, too!!!
I’m a heretic in Jerrys eyes! 🙂
Jerry is always so quick to call others a heretic.
However I vividly recall hearing Jerry in an interview state that Charles Finney was a hero of his.
Go figure; talk about having a log in your own eye…
Now Finney is a heretic! He denied the substitutionary atonement. You ain’t got that, you ain’t got any salvation. That is a hill I’ll die on. Without it, I have no hope.
Cave,
Thanks for bringing this to light. I’ve never been much of a fan of Falwell. He is notorious for putting his foot in his mouth. This would be another example. I understand that Charles Finney is often referred to as the father of the seeker movement and was very unpopular with the reformers of his time. Sounds like Falwell is falling in line behind him.
Falwell has done some good things, which I can applaud. For instance, homes for pregnant girls where they can be nurtured, educated and encouraged until the child is born. If they choose to have the child adopted, great. He is doing more than saying abortion is wrong, but providing other viable options.
Theologically…. we differ on a number of items.
If we’re taking roll call for Jerry’s “heretic squad,” then my hand is firmly in the air and I’m loudly declaring, “PRESENT.” And sitting beside me and also counted on the roll are the likes of Jonathan Edwards, John Bunyan, John Owen, Martyn Lloyd-Jones, John Piper, R.C. Sproul, Ligon Duncan, Wayne Grudem, and Sinclair Ferguson – not to mention the Apostle Paul and the rest of scripture!
I’m in good company!
Grasped Secure in the Grip of His Sovereign Grace,
Tom
Doctrine Matters
Calvin was a murderous heretic. He tortured Michael Servatus M.D., amongst others, to death for disagreeing with his heresy.
No Christian would kill, let alone torture to death, another person for their beliefs.
Calvin’s doctrine of predestination to hell mischaracterizes God as evil; this is the same sin that the pharisees committed when they accused Jesus of His good works by the power of satan, which is the unforgiveable sin.
If any Calvinist would try to tell an unbeliever about this crazy predestination to hell teaching, he may turn the person to despise the true God due to this errored and evil teaching.
Sigh………. seems you’ve been poisoned by tons of misinformation.
JL, it is time to do some research and put the death of Servatus into historical context. And get some facts correct.
Calvin was the State’s witness against Servatus since they had lengthy correspondence. Calvin often visited him in prison, pleading for him to repent of his heresy. Heresy, in Geneva at that time, was a State crime. He was put to death by the STate, not the church, and though involved you can’t lay the blood of Servatus at his feet.
God predestines the wicked to hell in light of their sin. It’s not evil, it is called justice. He does not prevent anyone from coming to faith. But all who do come to faith, come by his grace, not an effort of their own will, lest anyone should boast.
Calvinists don’t usually tell unbelievers this. We tell them that Jesus died to save sinners, repent and believe.
Why don’t you actually try reading some John Calvin- you might find him quite different than you’ve been led to believe.
Dear Cavman,
Would you testify against ANYONE about a disagreement in doctrine if you knew the law of the land was death by burning at the stake?
Just because it is a law does not make it righteous. It reminds me of the ‘good citizens’ of the nazi regime turning in the Jews, or the unregenerated Saul who persecuted believers before his conversion or the unbelievers in the last days as described in Mark 13:12.
Predestination is based on God’s foreknowledge of what a person chooses (Joshua 24:15).
Regarding your rewording of Ephesians 2:8-9, a choice is not ‘an effort’, it is simply a decision of one’s will.
If all mankind is totally depraved after the fall, how do you answer Romans 1:28?
Why don’t Calvinists usually tell unbelievers about “God predestinating people to hell…”? If it’s biblical doctrine, there is nothing to be ashamed about.
Finally, why read counterfeit when I have the truth available in the bible?
You are a fiesty one, Cavman!
JL,
It is easy for us to sit in judgment upon believers of another time and place.
It was not merely a disagreement about a doctrine, but one which had Servetus declared a heretic, and under the death sentence by the Inquisition. He was a wanted man all thought the Holy Roman Empire. The unfortunate connection between the state and church complicates matters, as Calvin was the chief theologian & pastor of the city. In no way was Servetus a fellow believer, denying the Trinity.
I guess I’d point you to Romans 2-3 to reveal that all people are depraved, for Paul quotes heavily from the OT to make his point that all are sinners, no one does good and no one seeks after God.
Romans 8:29 is pretty clear, that we are predestined on the basis of God knowing us, not our actions. Which Paul also presses in Romans 9 in discussing Jacob and Esau.
In terms of Romans 1:28, uh… God gave people over to a depraved mind because they suppressed the truth of God (which is clear) thru their unrighteousness. I’m not sure how you defend the goodness of man since God is revealing his wrath against humanity, as Paul goes at length the defend in Romans 1-3 so all are shut up in sin and w/out excuse.
You do not love those you disagree with well if you don’t understand their position first hand. I don’t attack strawmen, but I’ve read Arminians and found their arguments to not accurately capture the meaning of Scripture when kept in context. While I disagree with them, I don’t call them heretics, which implies they are not Christians. So .. though you think I’m fiesty, I may be more charitable than you. Aren’t we to be known by our love for one another?
Oh, I was wondering how it is you define “total depravity”. It is a term prone to misunderstanding.
I would hate to think that someone would consider the vast majority of the Puritans, Charles Spurgeon, Packer, Sproul, Sinclair Ferguson, C.J. Mahaney, Al Mohler, John McArthur, John Piper, Mark Driscoll, Tim Keller, Sam Storms … to be heretics and not benefit from their books and sermons. That would be a sad place to live.
Great points, jimmylegs — I’m with you all the way, and this agreement comes after decades of reading, listening to, and studying the Calvinistic “theology” of the likes of Sproul and MacArthur. You’ll never get a straight answer from these folks or their followers.
I just started reading Edwards’s “The Justice of God in the Damnation of Sinners” and couldn’t help but diametrically disagree with his contention that as humans we’re obligated to have infinite love, honor, and obedience for and to God, and if we fail, it logically follows that we deserve infinite punishment. Well, hey, from one Jon to another, what about the angels that didn’t fall? Are they not finite creatures? Is it not impossible for them, as it is for us finite humans, to have infinite love, honor, and obedience for and to God? Why, then, are they not currently suffering eternal damnation in hell?
Theologians like Sproul and MacArthur (and pastors of churches I have attended in the past) get much of their “theology” from “theologians of yore,” like Edwards, and at times place this “theology” on par or above what Scripture clearly indicates. I’ve even heard pastors claim things like, “we were all present with Adam at the Fall,” or, “the saints will eternally rejoice at the contemplation of the damnation of the wicked,” then declare, “does that surprise you? [good for the shock factor], well, it’s in the Bible.” No, it’s not in the Bible — it’s in the writings of men. I’ve confronted pastors on these things, and outside the pulpit they back down and say, “well, that’s not what I really meant.”
Romans 5 teaches, among other things, that due to our union with the first Adam all of us sinned when he did. This same principle works in our salvation. Christ saves all for whom he is the covenant head. If you don’t like the principle of being condemned in Adam, you can’t find salvation in Christ.
In Revelation 19 the church rejoices over the destruction of the wicked, not just an impersonal harlot.
should we not rejoice eternally over the mercy of God extended to the elect AND his justice? Are we to hate the justice of God in action? I think not. It is regrettable, but nonetheless beautiful.
Guess you missed the point, cavman.
Later
Your point seemed to be that they theology of the Puritans, and other Reformers, is not scriptural. My contention was that theirs is a reflection of Scripture. the ideas you find loathesome are, in fact, in Scripture.
PIED PIPER JOHN INVITES RICK WARREN HERETIC TO DG 2010
FIRST THE CLOSE WORK WITH EMERGENT CHURCH MARK DRISCOLL FOLLOWED BY A 8 MONTH LEAVE FROM MINISTRY DUE TO ” UNNAMED PRIDE ..? ” NOW HIS DESIRING GOD CONFERENCE HAS NOTED HERETIC PROSPERITY GOSPEL MONEY HUNGRY MEGACHURCH AUTHOR RICK WARREN AS A SPEAKER. WHAT’S SAD IS SO MANY YOUTH OF TODAY PASTORS OF TOMORROW FOLLOW PIPER’S HEDONIST DOCTRINE OF PREACHING TEACHING & WRITINGS ! ENOUGH IS ENOUGH JOHN, COME BACK TO YOUR FIRST LOVE !!
MRWBBIII
I hesitated to approve this comment. I found much untruth, and lack of love in it.
1. Mark Driscoll is NOT part of the emergent church movement. He does NOT want to rethink theology, but embraces a mostly Reformed theology. He is orthodox, not a heretic (unless like Falwell you think Calvin a heretic).
2. While I do not agree with Warren’s methodology, and at times he is vague- I find no reason to call him a heretic. He is NOT a prosperity teacher.
3. Piper’s views on Christian hedonism are not innovative by any means. He is dependent on Jonathan Edwards, John Calvin and many of the Puritans including Jeremiah Burroughs (see his book the Rare Jewel of Christian Contentment). You have a bone to pick with some very godly and wise exegetes of the Scriptures, not merely John Piper.
4. While I do not know Dr. Piper personally, I can see how pride could lead him to be away from home too much (his dad was often away as an itinerant evangelist) to preach & teach. I can see the need to spend time with his wife and family.
While you may not agree with these men on particular issues, you have mischaracterized them, and I call you to repentance for slander and a lack of love.
JOHN PIPERS STRANGE REASONS FOR INVITING RICK WARREN TO DESIRING GOD 2010
[since you didn’t acknowledge any wrong doing in slandering others, I removed the link. This is NOT a forum for you to trash your brothers.]
I think we all should stop throwing around the word “heretic” in relation to the Calvin v. Arminian age old debate of limited v. universal atonement. There are many theological misunderstandings and even blatant untruths put out there, which are heretical because they change and can even subvert and pervert the gospel, but this debate is not one of them. There are numerous precepts in the Bible unrelated to the gospel which should be counted in the category “a mystery of God.” I personally feel both sides of this debate have very legitimate theological arguments, and I choose not to take a hard stance on an issue that does not have a hard truth presented in the Bible as this one does. If we were able to know for certain what side the truth lies on this is argument, would it change anything as to how we live our Christian lives? Would it change the gospel of the cross and ressurrection? The answer is no. Paul talked often of not creating division in the church over theological differences, and instructed us to love each other and to not let these types of arguments come between us and other believers. I think the subject of universal v. limited atonement is a fascinating conversation, but let’s not bring division and heretical accusations into this sphere.
I recommend you look up the definition of heresy; (2nd Peter 2:1-2).
No worries about me though, I do not advocate burning a person at the stake for errant beliefs.
The god 👺 of calvinism predestines people to hell; thereby, mischaracterizing the True God of the Bible. Heed the warning that Jesus told the Pharisees for mischaracterizing the character of God (Matthew 12:24-32).
well, as for me… i call Piper a heretic in a few regards, and all 5 point Calvinists. To say that you are chosen to go to heaven or hell before you were born quite apart from anything you could have EVER done about it is not the gospel of Christ, but another gospel, which is no gospel at all. NOW they are even saying that the new birth is not the same as being saved. You are born again so that you may believe (rather than what the text says… that he who believes is saved…. it becomes he who is saved then believes. ) The gospel according to the calvinists should carry the tag line: God is not your friend and Jesus is not your savior. (ah… unless you are one of the lucky ones he happened to choose)
👍
I guess Romans 9, and the OT passage it quotes, is heretical.
You’re trying to get too logical. Justification is when you are saved. God regenerates us so we’ll believe & be justified and saved. Acts also speaks of God as granting repentance. It was not something they conjured up on their own.
I’ll spare you any disparaging remarks about Arminianism. It is one thing to have different views on how we are saved, or rather salvation is applied. We both believe people are saved by the obedience and substitutionary death of Christ. Right? Not all wrong teaching is heretical teaching that puts salvation in doubt.
Hi again Cavman,
Do you believe that God gives unregenerated man the ability to recognize and even possibly appreciate righteousness without a/His rightousness unto salvation? Additionally, I was simply being playful when I called you fiesty on 4-18-09. I apologize if I hurt your feelings.
It would be a matter of degree. Unbelievers can understand Scripture, to a degree. But, as Paul says, the unregenerate are hostile to God, and God’s law. So, while they have some longing for justice- it is for the sins committed against them, not their own sins.
Hi Cavman,
If Calvinism predestines people to heaven and hell without any consideration of one’s free-will, how can one know their destination upon hearing the gospel?
How do you introduce this entity to people without scaring the life out of them?
This predestination to hell belief is as indicative of this entity’s character as is the love of the God of the bible is indicative of His character!
There is no need to evangelize in Calvinism as everyone’s fate is sealed!
I suppose that I would act like I love this entity out of fear so that if I do meet this entity in heaven, the entity would not be mad at me when I get there.
To make an analogy, a group of kids tell me that the new kid Larry already decided whether or not he will beat me up after school or be my friend and there is nothing I can say or do that will change his mind about his decision, Oh, and by-the-way, they say Larry is a good guy. I am going to be uncertain and live in fear of this Larry.
Another group of kids tell me that Larry is a good guy and he has said and a;ready proven that he wants to be my friend and he has said that it it up to me whether I want to be his friend or not. I want to meet and befriend this Larry.
Jimmy,
You manifest many common misunderstandings about Calvinism. Or perhaps confusions would be better.
I will quote from the Westminster Confession of Faith to clarify some of them.
II. Although, in relation to the foreknowledge and decree of God, the first Cause, all things come to pass immutably, and infallibly; yet, by the same providence, He orders them to fall out, according to the nature of second causes, either necessarily, freely, or contingently. (On Providence, V, II)
We see here that God’s providence establishes 2ndary causes. He ordains not only what happens, but how it will happen. Evangelism is one of the means God uses to bring people to saving faith in Christ. As a result, He commands us to engage in evangelism (see the Great Commission in Mt. 28). Those who are regenerate will want to share the gospel, not hide behind God’s eternal decrees.
We see something similar in the chapter on God’s Eternal Decrees, but an important addition.
I. God from all eternity, did, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely, and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass; yet so, as thereby neither is God the author of sin, nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures; nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established.
We see here that the “will of the creatures” is not violated. This is mysterious to a degree. God does not make people do anything. He does “work in them to will & act according to his purpose” (Philippians 2). This is why we believe regeneration precedes faith. God removes the heart of stone, making us able to believe, and wanting to believe because He has removed our blindness.
How do I know whether I am elect or not? Do I believe in Christ as He is presented to us in the gospel? If I don’t believe I may or may not be elect (I could come to faith later in life)? The elect will come to saving faith in Christ. Our salvation is not apart from Christ, and faith in Him (except for those with extraordinary circumstances- elect infants dying in infancy, elect persons with a mental defect etc.).
You also fail to come to grips with the reality of depravity w/regards to humanity. Apart from regeneration, people hate the God of the Bible precisely because He is holy, just and righteous and they know they are wicked and corrupt. They fail to see the depths of His mercy & compassion because their hearts are hardened against Him.
Hi Cavman,
I am basing my arguments on the average person’s understanding of Calvinism.
1. Total depravity (Original Sin)
2. Unconditional election (God’s Election)
3. Limited atonement (Particular Redemption)
4. Irresistible grace (Effectual Calling)
5. Perseverance of the Saints.
I am particularly addressing the doctrine of unconditional election in my analogy.
Do you feel that these points represent both the common understanding of Calvinism and what you also believe? Your explanations seem to differ from hardcore Calvinists that I have met (for example, your statement: ‘God does not make people do anything’ {does that include being saved?}). Additionally, I believe that that the bible indicates that man has a sense or an awareness of righteousness (Romans 1:19-20 and Romans 2:15); that is NOT a righteous unto salvation. It IS God given (not to take away from our total depravity apart from God and His righteousness) so that mankind has the ability to recognize the nature and character of God and to be able to love God if he CHOOSES to do so. God has made every effort to reach-out in love to mankind but He never forces the decision.
I respect your appreciation for the love, character and nature of God Cavman.
Some who say they are Calvinists talk more like determinists. I find the Confessions help us avoid the extremes to which we are prone.