If I’m a Calvinist, Why Do Calvinists Sometimes Annoy Me?
Posted by Dave Miller in Baptist Life, Bible & Theology
Okay, I’m going to make a confession. I’m a Calvinist. I believe that salvation starts in the heart of God not the will of a human being. I believe that God is sovereign in salvation. But I have been reluctant to publicly identify myself as a Calvinist. And there is a reason for that. I’m annoyed by the attitudes and behavior of a lot of Calvinists in the SBC.
God’s Sovereignty: It Seems Clear to Me!
I don’t see how some people can read the pages of the New Testament and come away with a belief that salvation is rooted in man’s free will, not God’s sovereign purpose of grace.
1 John 4:19 tells us that “We love because he first loved us.” The passage probably describes the love we are to have for one another, but it makes a clear point – that our spiritual life roots in the love God has for us, not in our choices or responses to him.
Look at Ephesians 1:4-5. “He chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love he predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ…” Why have we become holy and blameless? Because he chose us. Why are we adopted as sons? Because he predestined us. When did all this take place? Before the foundation of the world. Seems pretty clear to me.
Paul told Timothy (2 Timothy 1:9) that God saved us “not because of our works but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before the ages began.” We are saved not because of what we do, but because of the purposes of God and the grace he showed as he worked out those purposes.
Verses like this are hardly unique in scripture. In fact, the evidence is pretty consistent that salvation begins with God. We respond to what he does.
I’d love to hear a non-Calvinist adequately explain Acts 13:48. “And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord, and as many as were appointed to eternal life believed.” The Gentiles heard the gospel and rejoiced. Then, those who were appointed to eternal life believed and were saved.
And, of course, there’s Romans 9.
So, I affirm the core truth of the Calvinist system; that salvation starts in God’s choice before in results in our choice. I don’t buy into the whole Calvinist system; I reject paedobaptism, struggle with limited atonement, don’t subscribe to the “Reformed” system, am suspicious of the creedalism that many exhibit, and can’t buy into the Covenant theology and the eschatological systems based on it.
And Now, to Offend the Calvinists
Having said all that, I often find myself annoyed and uncomfortable with Calvinists. It seems to me that proper theology ought to lead to proper behavior. And frankly, I see a lot of behavior in my fellow sovereign grace adherents that I do not really agree with.
I’m going to spell some of that out. Let me say clearly that what I am saying here does not apply to all Calvinists, perhaps not even to a majority of them. “Some of my best friends are Calvinists.” But here goes, my fellow-Calvinists. Here’s some things I’ve seen that really annoy me. I can only imagine the offense I’m going to cause, but I think that we, who believe in God’s sovereign grace need
Perhaps many of you will add one more. “Calvinists who write blog posts about what annoys them about Calvinists.”
1) “Cage-Phase Calvinists” make huge messes.
I don’t know who came up with that designation, but it is tremendously accurate. When people first discover the “doctrines of grace” they often go through a phase in which it would be best to keep them in a cage so that they do no damage to the body of Christ.
Those who knew me in college can probably remember some heated argument I got in with somebody about predestination. It happened all the time. I’m not sure I convinced anyone of the election, but I’m sure I turned a few folks off about it during my cage phase.
There are several passionate anti-Calvinists at my current church. This is the flotsam of a cage-phase Calvinist who blew through the church staff a couple of years before I came on board. He offended pretty much everyone he did not convert. Now, there are people who recoil at the mention of the name John Piper and even have a visceral reaction to the word theology. He moved on (probably to productive, post-cage-phase ministry) and left all this turbulence in his wake.
Al Mohler recognized this phenomenon when he admitted in his debate with Paige Patterson that he knew Calvinists who would walk across the country to debate one of the points of Calvinism but wouldn’t walk across the street to share the gospel.
Maybe those of us who are more mature in our faith and theology (a nice term for old-fogey) can help those who newly discover these beautiful doctrines to maintain perspective and avoid the damage that some do.
2) Some Calvinists are arrogant.
Let’s face it. We who are Calvinists believe we have discovered a biblical doctrine that is crucial that others have yet to make peace with. We believe that our doctrine honors and glorifies God. If properly understood, Calvinist doctrine is humbling to the standing of human beings – giving all credit to God for the work of grace.
In fact, Calvinists will sometimes brag about the humility that this doctrine produces!
Unfortunately, we do not always live out our testimony. We act as if we are the spiritual elite, the keepers of true knowledge whose job it is to instruct all the uninitiated.
In one of my early pastorates, I had a “full-gospel” friend. We had some wonderful fellowship, but he felt as though I was missing out on a blessing I could have if I would just open myself to the knowledge and experience he had attained. The condescension I felt from him was annoying.
I think we sometimes give that attitude to those who do not see soteriology exactly as we do. We are the theological elite who have attained a superior knowledge that some lesser thinkers have not yet attained.
Let’s not be those people!
3) Some Calvinists have a hidden agenda.
There has been a lot of debate about whether Calvinists ought to reveal their theological predilections to the pulpit committees of churches. I was called to be pastor of Southern Hills Baptist Church in 2005 and the question of whether I was a Calvinist was not even raised. I don’t feel bad about that.
We should reveal our agendas plainly to committees. My agenda was to preach the Word, to try to seek healing for the wounds resulting from a church split, and to lead the church to find its biblical purpose. It was never my intent to make SHBC into a “reformed” Baptist church, so there was no reason for me to bring that up.
I know of a really good church that hired a pastor who kept his agenda completely secret. It was, evidently, his agenda to see that church became an SBC Calvinist outpost. The music program was reformed – Calvinist hymns only! Elder-rule replaced the more traditional polity. The Sunday School material had to be Calvinist. The invitation became a memory.
Here’s the thing. I don’t really have a huge problem with any of that. My problem is that had the pastor candidate told these people what he intended to do, he would have never become pastor. He knew exactly what he planned to do when he applied, but he did not tell anyone.
The result was conflict, chaos and hurt. Plus, it annoyed me!
4) Some Calvinists are spiritual eggheads.
I love God’s Word and think that doctrine is crucial. But I’ve known some Calvinists who acted as if any spiritual enthusiasm was somehow “charismatic” and ungodly. A passion for knowledge and truth is only a good thing if it is a passion for the knowledge of one who is “the Way, the Truth and the Life.”
One very close Calvinist friend used to always get nervous when I talked about a “personal relationship with God in Christ.” I read a book on worship by one well-known Calvinist author which condemned any emotional worship as modern-day Gnosticism.
Our faith is rooted in historical truth and biblical doctrine. But it produces a passionate and personal relationship with God in Christ. Experientialism is not the basis of truth, but having an experience is not contrary to truth.
Too many modern “theologians” are spiritual eggheads who excise experience and passion in pursuit of theological knowledge. Theology is useless if it does not produce an experiential knowledge of God. Theology as an end in itself is damaging.
5) Some Calvinists disdain those who disagree with them.
I’ve had a few friends who judged the worth of a teacher or preacher solely on the basis of his acceptance of or rejection of Calvinism.
Just because someone is not a Calvinist would not mean he is a heretic, or is unworthy to hear, or has nothing to say.
6) Calvinists often tend to engage in hero-worship.
It’s a strange phenomenon – a doctrine that is supposed to glorify God leads to hero-worship among its adherents. Do you know anyone whose entire library consists of Piper and Sproul? I know, its an exaggeration. But not by that much.
I love John Piper’s books and sermons. But I know people who cringe at his name because others acts as if every word he says is the very word of God. We had some friends in a previous pastorate whose theology basically consisted of “whatever Sproul said.” If you disagreed with R.C. you were a heretic. (Yes, they actually bandied that word around for the most insignificant of theological offenses).
And for goodness sakes, folks, read some people who do not tow the Calvinist line. Dr Howard Hendricks said that if you only read the books of those who agree with you, you will not learn. You will just reinforce your personal prejudices. To learn, you need to read and interact on a meaningful basis with those who disagree with you, who think your viewpoint is wrong.
I could continue, but it would seem like piling on.
In Fairness…
You could say a lot of the same things about non-Calvinists. Non-Calvinists often twist and pervert the doctrines of grace in an effort to refute them. They often define the middle by the extreme. Are there Calvinists who believe, “If God wants people saved, he will save them?” Yes. I have personal experience with people who believe that way.
But that is the extreme position. It is not fair to condemn the doctrine because someone abuses it. If you want to reject Calvinism, fine. Just reject what we believe, not what someone who did not understand Calvinism says we believe.
Conclusion
In conclusion, I would make some suggestions to my (now perhaps former) Calvinist friends. First, let’s show a little of the humility we talk so much about. Let’s realize that maybe our system doesn’t have all the answers, that there are a few mysteries still out there. Let’s open our minds and hearts to those Christians who love Jesus but not our doctrine.
Let’s realize that the unity of the Body of Christ is important, even with people who do not buy into what we offer. It is okay to welcome someone as a brother in Christ who has not yet seen the Calvinist light. We really can love and fellowship with people we disagree with.
And let’s show some perspective. This doctrine matters. Let us continue to proclaim what we believe. But let us also realize that some pretty good people don’t go along with this.



As to your #2,3,4,5 and 6, delete “Calvinist” and substitute “Baptist”.
I don’t know any universally appealing Christians, unfortunately. Except me, and modesty forbids me saying that.
That’s probably true, Bob. (Both statements!)
In all honesty, many of the annoyances of college age Calvinists are what kept me from honestly examining the theology for years. If God is as sovereign as they were saying, why did they have to be so aggressive?
I have become much less agitated and much more convinced of His control in ways I don’t understand. You could class me Calvinist if you need a box to put me in, but it won’t tape shut quite right.
It just took years to get there.
Doug
I have probably taken the opposite tack to end up very close to where you are, Doug. I was a pretty aggressive Calvinist back in my college days.
I don’t think my theology has changed that much. I guess I emphasize the “antinomy” principle more now – that the Bible also tells us that we have to believe and respond, even if human logic can’t figure it all out.
But I guess the biggest change is where I rank the doctrine in my affections.
Plain fact is that, whether you’re a Calvinist, or a (insert favorite word for other-than-Calvinists), your job is to tell the good news.
Tell. Not SELL. That’s the job of the Holy Spirit. Since I figured that out, you could listen to me teach a long time and not tell I am a Calvinist, without asking me.
Yep!
I know exactly what you are talking about. I deal with it frequently. Funny thing is that I am not a dyed-in-the-wool Calvinist; yet I am Calvinistic doctrinally. I do not discuss how many points I do or do not agree with. I get enough grief caring for the people I have in my own area of ministry, I don’t need the added grief of unnecessary theological debate. I have been condemned to the fires of hell, un-friended, unfunded, and down right buried under by people who call themselves Calvinist. Yet, our ministry grows. The lost are hearing the gospel. And God is still in control.
There’s a balance between what you are saying and what Andrew says below. I think it is important that we engage in lively, biblically based debate/discussion – as he said. But, it needs to avoid getting mean spirited or condemning.
What can I say, my wife won me over before we were even dating. We started debating, heated, but productive, about God’s choosing some and not others, and eventually I came around.
It was a firm believe in the things you point out in the first part of your post—God’s sovereignty—that led to the inevitable conclusions.
Whichever side we are on, we need to be humble, return to the Word, and enjoy a good heated debate when the proper time and place permits.
After I was saved, I became compelled at word studies. Bill Gothard had started out his seminars with simple definitions of words and grace was one I could not get a grasp on. I needed a skin covering on grace in order for me to understand it. I was never approached by Calvinist and didn’t believe that way. My paradigm would not allow me to accept that. As I was teaching my singles class about this new understanding of grace one of the pretty young ladies who had introduced me to the Institute in Basic Youth Conflicts interrupted me and told me that I was teaching Calvinism. I assured her that I did not believe that. She began explaining to me what I was saying and I could not disagree with her. The following week I began reading up on what Calvin believed and, low and behold, the Word began to form a different meaning. I could not get enough.
I do my dead level best not to argue with people because I know how God works in this area. Since He is sovereign, I would only delay or confuse the matter if God’s grace is not leading someone in that direction. I have had the great opportunity of leading someone to Christ and explaining how that grace worked in their life. I have also had the privilage of talking to others who were saved that were being transformed from the “free will” issue. Both are wonderful experiences.
The funny thing about the “fighting” Calvinist is that they are doing opposite of what they truly believe. They think proof convinces people to change into Calvinist and they are wrong. “for it is God who works in you both to will and to do for His good pleasure.” Phil 2:13
Great post. Keep it up!
You nailed it, Dave. Other Calvinists are probably the biggest reason I’m reluctant to self-identify as such.
And in fairness, if they are Calvinists by the grace of God, why do they think other people can become Calvinists by an act of free will? For that matter, why don’t they believe Amyraldians and Arminians were elected by God to be that way?
Just sayin’
Rick,
I like what you said better than how I tried to say it in the last paragraph of my comment above. I have continued to think about how some think they can “convince” others of their belief. Do you, or others here, think it spills over in how a man (layman or preacher) presents the gospel or a preacher preaches the Word or a teacher teaches the Word as well? We do walk out our faith in our everyday conversations, don’t we? If that is true, and someone fights to defend, not the faith, but what he beleives about the faith, I think it would be difficult to present faith without confusing what trusting in God’s sovereignty is all about. We seldom allow God to communicate truth to us in and through the trinity. As Paul says, “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit be with you all. Amen.” 2 Cor 13:14 The combination of each Head’s involvement in our lives solidify His truth and that truth changes us.
Bruce I like your question on the distinction between someone who fights to defend the faith versus what he believes about the faith. I heard once that the definition of a Fundamentalist is someone who honestly believes that God is exactly how they imagine him to be. I had to take a hard look at my own beliefs and realize that I wasn’t holding them in the humility of human frailty, but was cherishing them in the arrogance and conceit of human knowledge.
Another humbling experience for me was to observe a conversation between a die-hard and someone who was more sensible about his beliefs. The die-hard asked, “Are you suggesting that we can fellowship with brethren who are in error?” to which the interlocutor replied, “I know of no other kind.” The tricky part is to avoid thinking “Well, I may be wrong about some things, but I KNOW I’m not wrong about THAT.” Or the contested area of primary, secondary, and tertiary doctrines which sounds like a good idea until you run into people who want to say that their pet doctrine is primary even though you think it’s secondary. For example, how may Calvinists do you know who put TULIP in category 2 compared to those who think it is not only category 1, but also #1 in that category?
Amen, Rick, Amen
I’d love to hear a non-Calvinist adequately explain Acts 13:48. “And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord, and as many as were appointed to eternal life believed.”
Well, I will try… Being appointed (or ordained or disposed) to eternal life helps explain why they believed. Now an event in the context happening right then and there has more explanatory power and scope than an event not in the context and happening in eternity past. Hence the ordaining/appointing/disposing refers to God’s work in their hearts preparing them to believe right there on the spot rather than His predestination of them to be saved from eternity.
And the verse is silent on weather men can choose to say no to God’s preparatory work, it only says those that were prepared believed. But verse 48 seems to be in contrast to verse 46, which does seem to indicate men can choose to say no to God’s prepatory work:
Then Paul and Barnabas answered them boldly: “We had to speak the word of God to you first. Since you reject it and do not consider yourselves worthy of eternal life, we now turn to the Gentiles.
God be with you,
Dan
Thanks for the exegetical attempt, Dan. By the way, I love your screen name/real name thing. Very cool.
Here’s my observation on the verse. It seems evident that there are two groups there. “The Gentiles” hear the word and rejoice. Then, those appointed believe.
I’m not saying it settles the issue, but it does seem to dovetail with the Calvinist outlook pretty well.
Dave,
Nearly all true Baptists are Calvinistic. We might be 5-pointers, but we believe strongly in 2-4.5 points. There are very few who identify closely with Arminianism.
I’ve said for some time that the growing impasse between hardline 5-pointers and their opposition within the SBC will ultimately result in untold numbers of 5-pointers withdrawing and associating with smaller like-minded groups.
I’ve noticed a very thin skin among 5-pointers in regards to elections of officers, professors, and other leaders. When a 5-pointer is considered, the adherent automatically assumes he was rejected because is a 5-pointer. In some cases that actually might be the case, but in far more, I believe, it is simply because another is considered God’s choice for the position.
If we really believe that God is sovereign, let us accept with grace the results He brings about.
I’m currently coaching the JV boys and girls basketball teams at a local private school. I wanted to coach them last year, but another was selected, and while I felt a momentary sense of disappointment, I realized that God was in control of the situation. Through a series of unprecedented events, I was asked to coach this year. I did not anticipate the opportunity, and it has worked extreme hardship in many ways on my life. However, I have no doubt that God orchastrated those events for the purpose of placing me where I am.
I am not a 5-pointer but I believe God is in charge, and actively moving in such a way as to allow our lights to shine more brightly and more widely, if we simply rest in Him.
Both 5-pointers and non can prosper togather in His work, if we demonstrate through our daily lives that we really do trust Him to be in charge, all the while the SBC can prosper as an ever more effective tool for His glory.
Second sentence should read, “We might be 5-pointers, or not;…
Dave, well said. I am standing right beside you…probably could’ve written this post myself. This is why I have recently dropped out of blogging on my site, SBC Today, et al. I am tired of the incessant head-hunting and personal attacks. Both positions have their oops boys and their hero boys. Tell me what you believe, and if I look around long enough, I’m pretty sure I can find someone to give that group a black eye. Also, if I am am honest, I could look around and find a righteous, God-honoring Arminian just as well as the same who is a Calvinist.
Sola Gratia!
True, Scott. That’s why I only really confronted “my side” in this thing. I think one of the things that has to happen is that Calvinists hold Calvinists accountable and non-Calvinists hold non-Calvinists accountable, etc.
We tend to condemn that in our opponents which we commend in our friends.
David, again well said…now then there are those infallible Yankees, though!
Great post Dave, as always. I guess this means I have to stop telling people that I believe there is God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit, and Lew Miller!
Uh…yeah!
Dave,
I found your article interesting, but I was left hanging with several questions.
In your first paragraph, you state that you are a Calvinist, and you believe that salvation starts in the heart of God not the will of a human being.
Question: Are you suggesting that non-Calvinists do not believe that salvation begins in the heart of God?
You also believe that God is sovereign in salvation.
Question: Are you suggesting that non-Calvinists do not believe that God is sovereign in salvation?
Thanks and I look forward to your response.
Blessings!
The problems you have discussed concerning calvinists could just as easily be identified as belonging to arminians. Just this past week a friend was talking about Jack Hyles ruining a revival by telling a young man to set up in a pew (this young man required a metal framework just to enable him to sit. He could not move or set up). My friend told me (though he did not realize it) that Hyles who was by no stretch of the imagination a calvinist was displaying a personality disorder, a pathology involving control issues. Now you would expect that from someone who does not really believe in the Sovereignty of God, but people who claim to believe in Sovereignty also have the problem. It is a part of the evil of the Fall, the madness within to which Eccles.9:3 makes reference. Some where down the line, if one has really come to the truth, that truth will, like leaven, begin to work its way into that fallen personality to transform it. It is no easy matter to admit the truth into the inner personality and let it have its freedom to work, but that is what is required…and what must happen to the elect of God.
It helps to realize that every one of the five points of the TULIP acrostic (total depravity, unconditional election, limited atonement, irresistible grace, perseverance/preservation of the saints, along with predestination and reprobation are all invitations, indeed the most intense invitations. They are paradoxical interventions designed to seize the interest, affections, attention of the individual and bring him or her to commitment in the freest manner possible. I have been a Sovereign Grace believer since 1963, and i had to fight a round with every truth and learn that it was meant to be a winsome doctrine, one designed to win, transform, and mature the individual believer, male or female, producing a sense of responsibility which arminianism can never equal. Dr. George W. Truett said it well in his centenary address at the celebration of the 100th anniversary of Spurgeon’s birth in England after being introduced by the Prime minister as the keynote speaker, “Calvinism pressed down upon the brow of man the crown of responsibility.” In American Social and Intellectual History the Puritans are noted for the iron like sense of responsibility. one can’t discourage a person who believes God has predestined and purposed that he or she should accomplish something for his glory on earth.
What brother Miller has done is simply register his dismay at the display of depravity by those who have yet to realize the full implications of the grace of God in changing the human personality from its perverse ways into those which magnify and honor God. God’s time table in the process is not ours. His patience with such intransigence is really grounds for hope as we learn to take the longer view, the perspective from the Divine purpose. Change is a process, one that takes a great deal of time. Look at those last two complete years that Joseph spent in prison, bringing to at least 14 from his arrival in Egypt. Was it the final refining fire that brought the mnolten mettle of his personality to a fine reflection of God’s determinate course and way for him to conduct himself as ruled Egypt? After all, it takes a man knowledgeable in the ways of patience and insight and understanding to deal with masses of people requiring the guidance of a firm hand. Don’t feel bad Mr. Miller, all of God’s servants – even those with little or no understanding of Sovereign Grace – go through the trial of denial in order to advancement in true service.
Was the theif on the cross a Calvanist or was Jesus’ all he needed, just His gospel? He wants us to focus on the cross and preach his gospel. How many people are saved at a debate on Calvanism?