Ok I had a very interesting discussion at lunch today with some friends and it led me to get inspired to make a second post today. Why do we use titles and more specifically in the Christian world. How often has someone walked up to you and ask, "Hey what religion are you?" and what they really meant was, "What denomination are you?" This question led me many years ago to start responding to that question as "I am a Christian!" Now this answer seemed to puzzle those who meant to ask what denomination I am a part of and I would always reply with "I attend a Baptist Church." This used to be enough of a response but it seems as though here recently....and maybe it is because of my work and because of my location...that to be labeled a Christian is not simply enough anymore. Let me go in to a little detail....
In Louisville the hot button issue is Calvinism. For those not familiar Calvinism, it is a particular theological view of salvation. It is one of many views on salvation. Well the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, which is located in Louisville, has a president who labels himself a Calvinist. But what makes this interesting is this...Calvinism has 5 point of belief about salvation commonly referred too as the T.U.L.I.P. Now I have studied these 5 point and do not agree with all 5. I agree with 3 or 4 depending on who the context of the conversation I am in places these points. None the less I do not agree with all 5. Calvinism = 5 points thus Brandon <> (that means doesn't equal to in programming language) Calvinist or for you math folks out there 4 doesn't equal five. This seems rather basic to me or so I thought.
Well that isn't the case. Apparently the new trend(and I am not sure why) is that if you agree with 4 points you are a Calvinist. Now this is a very strange concept to me because that is like saying you are 80% pregnant. IT DOESN'T WORK LIKE THAT...you are either pregnant or you aren't so to me you are either a Calvinist and you believe all 5 points or you are not. So I guess my question is this, "Why label yourself something if you aren't that?" I am really interested in answers to this question because we had 3 people at the table at lunch and really came up with 3 different answers!
4 comments:
so I'm hoping that people aren't labeling me a clavanist now. Since some of their beliefs are very scriptural, and really can't be argued. To follow a certain idea or line of thinking, don't you actually have to follow it.
If I have a problem with election, then I obviously differ from a main foundational point of the belief, so why could I still be considered a calvanist?
And I'm not sure that it is really that big of an issue in Louisville, at least not once you get out of the Baptist circles (which you are relatively stuck in).
In my (ironically somewhat presbyterian) denomination I hardly ever hear it discussed. And the Catholics, which a good bit of Louisville residents are, could really care less about it, I think.
But anyway, my thoughts are basically, if I agree with 4 points of calvanism, not saying I do or don't, just saying if. If I believe in 4 points of Calvanism, who calls me a calvanist? I certainly don't. Are Modern Calvanists now lessening their requirements to get into their club? I somehow doubt that as well.
There are Five main things to know about Jesus. 1. He was God incarnated into a mans body. 2. He lived a perfect sinless life to atone for everything I did wrong. 3. He died..completely dead... to be an atoning sacrifice for my sins. 4. He came back from the Dead to conquer death, and Show his power as God. And 5. By Believing in Him, I have eternal Life, and salvation from the death my own actions would have brought upon me. If I disagree with one of those things, am I still a Christian?
Blogger just ate my comment, so I'm not going to take the time to rewrite. In a nutshell - Calvinists holding to 4 or 5 points are in very close company, so it's still a heplful term. People usually clarify if they hold to 4 or 5, so the label still helps communicate a belief position effectively.
Well I do hate to toot my own horn, but I like just made a quick comment on my blog concerning something like this. Just a little blurb at the bottom of my last post if you're interested.
I think the biggest misunderstanding is not what Calvinism is, but rather how it is distinct from other forms of theology. The main distinction that Calvin made was the uttermost sovereignty of God. Not to say that other theologies don't recognize this, just that Calvin made it a distinct point of interest in his works.
So when you get to the big Calvinism/Arminianism debate, it is failed to be recognized (mainly by the Calvinists I might add) the validity of the Arminian stance as it still is Reformed- that is, still in line with the lines of distinction that Calvin himself set up. A good book on the subject is Olsen's Arminian Theology.
I think too many people, especially those of Baptist persuasion, only think that there are those two options- Calvinism and Arminianism. What they fail to recognize is that since they both stem from Reformed theology, one is not forced to be in either. One might be Lutheran, or Catholic, or Anglican, or Orthodox. God's soveriengty is recognized, just not over- emphasized as it is in Reformed theology.
That being said, once one is recognized as being a Reformed theologian (as distinguished from being a Reformation theologian) then one can agree with the Synod of Dort, or Arminius, or some combination of the two. Logically, I think you're right, that 4/5 does not make one Calvinist. At that point the person should just stick to the general label "Reformed" and then explain exactly which points they might dis/agree with.
I think there has been too much 'either-or' in the Christian world (especially with Baptists which have historically been influenced from both Methodism (Arminianism) and Reformed theology). And not understanding history and different theologies its too easy to assume that there is only one 'correct' way of thinking about God. Labels can be useful, but only if everyone is willing to listen to the other, and still accept them as a brother/sister at all times.
THank you for your comments so far everyone. This is the kind of discussion that should be had and the manner of which this dicussion is happening is healthy. Josh thank you for bring it all back to the fact that we are all brothers/sisters in Christ if of if not you believe in Calvinism
Post a Comment