Posts Tagged ‘ T.heology

If Not Calvinism?

@StevenPatton tweeted the following:

The more I study it, the less I like the term “Calvinism.” if it’s biblical then it’s just biblical. Plus it neglects the people like Augustine b4 who had similar beliefs.

Certainly, there’s familiarity with the term. You say “Calvinism” and people are going to either ask what you’re talking about or run with ideas of predestination, total depravity, absolute sovereignty, etc. But it’s easy for someone to dismiss Calvinism ipso facto if their understanding is that it is the belief of a man rather than the system of theology clearly revealed in the Scriptures by the Lord God Almighty.

So if you were charged with the re-branding of Biblical Christianity (Calvinism), what terms would you use or avoid? I kind of like the idea of just cycling through biblical theologians and adding -ism, -ist, or -an to them. (Hodgeism, Knoxan, Edwardsist, etc.).

Different Hearers. Same Gospel.

While reading the second volume of David Calhoun’s fantastic book, Princeton Seminary: The Majestic Testimony, I came across this helpful piece of teaching by A. A. Hodge.

Hodge compared the difference between “hearers of the same gospel.” “A” became a Christian, and “B” did not. Why? Hodge answered:

The Pelagian says – “A’s purpose was sufficient: he willed it, and he became a Christian.”

The Semi-Pelagian says – “A did his best, and God helped him.”

The Arminian says – “A used the gracious ability, the prevenient grace, give by God to all, while B did not.”

The Lutheran says – “A and B both needed prevenient and cooperating grace. Neither could cooperate, but either might resist. B did resist, while A did not. Hence the difference.”

The Calvinist says – “A was regenerated by the grace of Almighty God.”