This website is a member of Liberty Alliance, which has been named as an company.

Where Christianity intersects with politics, culture, and entertainment.


newcalvin

The New Calvinism: Theological Movement or Propaganda Tool?

by Jesse Locken

In 2009, TIME Magazine ran a series of stories titled “10 Ideas Changing the World Right Now”, with the subheading: "The global economy is being remade before our eyes. Here's what's on the horizon." My guess is that most people would look at the list of ten ideas and not bother to stop and question how they relate to each other, but the editorial staff at TIME who selected these ten ideas to publish certainly believes there is a relationship between them as it pertains to the “global economy being remade.”

Topics include employment, human DNA banks, Africa as a business destination, the “green” movement, and something TIME calls “The New Calvinism”, a movement portrayed by author David Van Biema as the latest development in “conservative Christianity” which is also supposedly “Evangelicalism's latest success story”. We find out the players in this movement include John Piper, Mark Driscoll, and Al Mohler. These men apparently have no issue with the article's portrayal of their faith, and in particular Mohler and Driscoll express explicit support of Time's coverage of their views.

In an endorsement of Time's recognition of “American Christianity”, Mohler stated:

“TIME’s attention to theological issues and the importance of worldview is to be admired and appreciated here.”

And:

“The presence of such a serious theological “idea” among the ten is a sign that TIME takes religion and its coverage of American Christianity with seriousness. The presence of “The New Calvinism” alongside “Amortality” is a sign of our times — and one we do well to ponder.”

A similar endorsement from Driscoll goes so far as to describe the New Calvinism as “powerful,” with a dialectical form of argument pitting the four positive benefits of the New Calvinism as opposed to the four negatives of what he terms “Old Calvinism” against each other.

An observation of the progress of the “New Calvinism” over the past three years may give one the idea of how this movement really might be helping certain interests “remake the global economy”. The New Calvinism is virtually silent with regard to U.S. fiscal policy, war, education, and politics and how these topics relate to Scripture. Rather than seeking to establish a Biblical worldview with regard to such matters, churches such as Driscoll's Mars Hill have recently begun to support the U.S. military (may I note, with far more of Driscoll's books than Bibles) and turn to public school educators to “architect” curriculum to instruct their children about Jesus and the Scriptures.

In addition, both Driscoll and Mohler are influential in large networks of churches, with Driscoll's Acts 29 and Resurgence reaching across the U.S. and globally, and by Mohler's own claim the Southern Baptist Convention contains the largest number of “megachurches” within a single denomination here in the U.S.

When the leading theologians and pastors of such large megachurches approve and defend a representation of their beliefs made by publications such as TIME, which is a magazine run by socialists, Marxists, worshipers of the State, and proponents of war as a tool for social change (Fareed Zakaria comes to mind) one must question what these men believe about these topics and why they remain virtually silent on these subjects in their doctrine, teaching, and views, as if the Bible is also silent on these subjects. To see their churches a few years later implementing increasingly pro-State ideologies and “ministries”, seems a logical progression of an underlying philosophical idea that is inherently antithetical to the Scriptures, whether or not these men wish to acknowledge it.

As an interesting corollary, just a few of the other topics mentioned in TIME's “10 Ideas” caught my eye recently . The UN is performing land-grabs in Africa, Homeland Security is implementing measures to collect DNA from young children, and unemployment numbers are increasing in the U.S.; with jobs being scarce, employment is now perceived as an asset (as the TIME article pointed out) which has created a class envy between the employed vs. the unemployed. The advancement of these ideas in just a few short years should certainly cause one to pause.

Why is the New Calvinism among these other concepts of how the “global economy is being remade before our eyes”? Taken in context with the progression of the nine other ideas it had been associated with in 2009, The New Calvinism seems to be yet another propaganda tool used by elitists to continue the suppression of the Christian faith to a personal worship hobby that must adapt to the “transforming” culture around it (which in America, has become a veritable culture of death and destruction).

And in a nation continually bent towards the idolatry and worship of the State, it's no surprise that the largest churches tend to be those that do not question what a majority of Americans have been indoctrinated to believe, which is ultimately obedience to and support of the dialectical left versus right, highly centralized and militaristic American Empire. In turn, this American Empire is run by elitist globalists who, in a quest for power over others, seek a reduction in population, manipulation and control of what should be a free marketplace, and rule by force and coercion in foreign countries, all ideas in total opposition to the Bible. The New Calvinism's failure to confront the idolatry and worship of the State perpetuates the continual loss of liberty and the retreat of the Christian faith from the civil and political sphere, which is precisely what globalist elitist powers wish for.


Jesse Locken is an average guy with a full-time job as a sales consultant who desires to apply God’s Word to all of life. He resides in the beautiful Pacific Northwest in Seattle, WA. He blogs, rants, analyzes, and vents at his website, FrequencyPropogation.

 
Posting Policy

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse. Read more.

If you find a comment offensive, please flag it as inappropriate by hovering over the down arrow to the right of that comment and clicking on the "Flag as inappropriate" text. Once a comment receives three "flags," it will be hidden from further view.

  • Robert De Leon

    While John Calvin defied Pope's Authority he became a theocrat – ruling a s a dictator. Quite incongruent.
    It’s so easy to believe what another person is telling to us, mainly if that person it looks so respectfully. When another person listens to him it doesn’t know if the “respectfully” person is lying or not. As a matter of fact someone never doubt about what the elder is saying.
    But what about if the younger person starts to explore or investigate what the elder said to him and finds that he only was lying?
    Same applies to a Protestant believer that since a long time ago has listened to elder Protestant people attacking the Catholic Church. It’s not younger people’s fault. Put the blame on the elder.
    Perhaps every Protestant should to investigate the Catholic Faith very deep and without prejudices That is to say trying to find the Truth. Every Protestant should find that the Catholic Faith it’s true just because Our Dear and Sweet Jesus Christ founded upon His Apostles with St. Peter as the first of the Apostles. We can read all of this in the Bible if we exam it very deep and – I must repeat it – without prejudices and without pay attention to what some other people said against Catholicism by hate and/or ignorance.
    The people that live and practice the Catholic Faith – learnt from the Gospels and Church History (now XX Centuries after Jesus Christ earthly life) find that everything is true and that elder Protestants were lying. The Catholic Church has the Bible as the main basis for our Faith. We are nurturing from the Bible, the Word of the Lord, from the Apostles’ successors and their teachings – coming from the Bible as well and not from men.
    I’ve lived as catholic – a practicing catholic and I know all this quite well.
    Martin Luther, John Calvin, Queen Elizabeth I, Zwinglio et al tried to reform the Catholic Church but in the end they only got to reform each other.
    The Catholic Christian and Roman Church is just one. The Protestant “churches” are a lot – too many we should say. The Catholic Christian and Roman Church have 20 Centuries. The Protestant “churches” – founded by men – are thousands and only have a little less than 5 centuries.
    I might be writing more about all this but I feel that this is enough.
    Robert.

    • Daniel heisner

      It takes only superficial study to see that the majority of RC doctrine is not in the Bible, but is man made. Read the letters of Paul, who was personally taught by Jesus. Do you read about infallible popes and church councils? Do you see anything that resembles the mass? How about Is there anything in there telling you to put Mary idols in your yard and pray to her as if she were as important as Jesus? You need to put aside all the damnable heresy you have been taught and read the Bible for yorself.

      • Robert De Leon

        Daniel:
        How could St. Paul be taught by my Dear Lord Jesus Christ personally if they only met in the way to Damascus? See? That;s the problem with "deformers". They interpret the Bible to his/her own opinion. Wrong!
        You should say that St. Paul was inspired by the Holy Spirit as well. That's correct.
        Regarding to the Mother of God, Blessed Virgin Mary, I'll ask you something that nor even one "deformer" answers.
        Do you dare to say: "Jesus I love you and you are my Savior, but I don't like your mother"?
        Robert.

        • bighoss

          Silly man! Your challenge is nonsense. How one regards the former virgin Mary is not a like-or-don't-like-matter. It is one thing to respect her role as the earthly vessel through whom Christ entered the world. it is quite another (and quite an abominable) thing to establish the patently unscriptural and idolatrous concept of Mary cooked up by the Catholic Cult.

          • http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22306708/Jn6.37.png Despeville

            Hoss,

            Is this Mary of the Bible? Is this Biblical Faith on display? —-> http://bit.ly/KOzhAE

            Now sit down Hoss and look at this portrayal of Roman Catholic demon of Mary —-> http://bit.ly/KXBeHo

          • Dionesius3

            Aha, Post-Millenialism rears it's ugly and deformed head yet again from the trash-heap of discarded and foolish heresies. You must be joking when you say- "Society will be transformed by people preaching the gospel to the lost. "

            Do you honestly believe that society can be transformed?

          • http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22306708/Jn6.37.png Despeville

            Who me? I am not post millennial.

          • Dionesius3

            No that post got put in the wrong place for some reason.

          • wesley

            yes. all you have to do is look at the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries of American history. we got rid of slavery. it was the Calvinist George Whitfield who brought slavery to the British colonies here in America in the first place. we built a nation that Christ was the only King. it took just three centuries with ten major waves of persecution for the church of Jesus Christ to take over Rome. look at Daniel 7 where the kingdom was handed over to the Saints. all it takes is for the church of Jesus Christ to more with Christ instead of waiting for a rapture that does not exist in scripture.

          • http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22306708/Jn6.37.png Despeville

            I guess it was "Calvinist" Paul who said this too:

            'Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to win their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord."

            ~ Colossians 3: 22

            You have a grotesque and anachronistic view of the Church and history… :)

          • wesley

            i meant the church to move with Christ.

          • Eric

            "Do you honestly believe that society can be transformed?"

            Umm, yes. You don't? You believe the Gospel of Jesus Christ will be ineffective and untransforming? How sad…

          • Dionesius3

            Then you are a disciple of the "social gospel" and are also likely a postmillinialist. Which means you believe and accept principles and concepts that are not found in Scripture. Just wanted to make sure I understood correctly your world-view.

            It is by the way a false belief system that has been totally discredited for thousands of years now.

          • Eric

            So the whole "going into all the world and making disciples of all nations" will ultimately be a failure? The last time I checked that WAS in the Bible and IS what Jesus wants us to be doing. I make no apologies for disagreeing with your defeatist pessimistic theology. You may believe you're wasting your time here on Earth, but I certainly don't believe that.

          • Dionesius3

            The call to evangelize has nothing whatsoever to do with the social gospel or post-millenialism?
            Here is a simple explanation from Wikipedia perhaps you can read and comprehend this simple explanation;
            "Reconstructionist postmillennialism, on the other hand, sees that along with grass roots preaching of the Gospel and explicitly Christian education, Christians should also set about changing society's legal and political institutions in accordance with Biblical, and also sometimes Theonomic, ethics (see Dominion theology). The revivalists deny that the same legal and political rules which applied to theocratic state of Ancient Israel should apply directly to modern societies which are no longer directly ruled by Israel's prophets, priests, and kings. In the United States, the most prominent and organized forms of postmillennialism are based on Christian Reconstructionism and hold to a reconstructionist form of postmillennialism advanced by Gary North, Kenneth Gentry, and Greg Bahnsen.

          • Dionesius3

            You are following the ideals and teachings of a long line of cranks, freeks, and charlatans. You would be well off studying and researching the history of Dominion Theology, and Post Millenialism , and recognizing what shaky ground your beliefs are built upon.

          • Eric

            "The call to evangelize has nothing whatsoever to do with the social gospel or post-millenialism?"

            Are you stating this or asking it? Are you really claiming that an evangelized and discipled world would look and act no differently than an unevangelized and undiscipled one? What then does the Gospel actually do?

            The fact that you think the social gospel and postmillennialsim are even remotely synonymous proves that you know not what you are talking about. Referencing Wikipedia on this topic is even further proof. The only thing the Wiki definition got right is that North, Gentry, and Bahnsen all consider themselves to be Postmill Reconstructionists. However, even among these three, there is substantial disagreement over particulars. I know two of these men personally (I never got to meet Dr. Bahnsen) and talk with them often, and despite what you think they are not "cranks, freeks, and charlatans." They are genuine men seeking to apply all of the Bible to all of life.

            I would venture to guess that you have never bothered to read an actual work by an actual Postmill author, preferring instead to let others (like Wikipedia) tell you what they believe. This is dishonest and disingenuous. Despite what you think you know the Bible teaches, you should always be willing to let other opinions have a chance to inform your views, rather than dismissing them out of hand. I was ignorant, like you, until I took the time to investigate and study. Now I am a "freek" too. (By the way, it is spelled "freak".) And I would much rather number myself with the freaks, than stand on your side and throw rocks and hurl insults at anyone who dares to crack open a Bible to "see if these things are so." I will leave you to your ignorance and pride…

          • wesley

            there is also Gary DeMar who is President of American Vision. DeMar studied history for his undergrad and then went to Reformed Theological Seminary for graduate work. they have a few free mp3 downloads that deal with Bible prophecy and eschatology. listening to them helped me see the flaw of despensationalism when it comes to Matthew 24 since it lines up with Luke 21 and Mark 13.

          • Eric

            I know Gary well. I worked with him at American Vision for several years. Gary's work in eschatology is his claim to fame, but he has certainly been helpful in the reconstruction debate as well.

          • Dionesius3

            Well, you got one fact correct in your reply, "And I would much rather number myself with the freaks,"

            Other than that you said nothing that was either factual or coherent. Enjoy your ignorance…

          • Eric

            Brilliant response. At least you know how to spell freak now.

          • wesley

            the statement at the Council of Chalcedon states "…for us men and for our salvation, of Mary the Virgin, Mother of God (Theotokos); one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten, recognized in two nature, without confusion, without change, without division, without separation;…" there in the statement that bring the two nature of Jesus together in one person call Mary the Mother of God. and by the way I am not Roman Catholic.

        • http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22306708/Jn6.37.png Despeville

          "How could St. Paul be taught by my Dear Lord Jesus Christ personally if they only met in the way to Damascus? See?"

          You are incredibly ignorant DeMelon. Ignorant, and lost. Here is how:

          "But when God, who had set me apart even from my mother’s womb and called me through His grace, was pleased 16 to reveal His Son in me so that I might preach Him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately consult with flesh and blood, 17 nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me; but I WENT AWAY TO ARABIA, and returned once more to Damascus.18 Then THREE YEARS LATER I went up to Jerusalem to become acquainted with Cephas, and stayed with him fifteen days. "

          ~ Galatians 1:15-18 NASB

          Paul spent THREE YEARS in desolate places of Arabia and most likely he was there personally instructed in the Gospel by resurrected Lord of Glory Jesus Christ the Righteous.

          "See? That;s the problem with "deformers". They interpret the Bible to his/her own opinion."

          Nope, that is the problem with your deformed and ignored mind and callous falsely religious heart that makes you utterly blind to the Word of God and its truth.

          "Do you dare to say: "Jesus I love you and you are my Savior, but I don't like your mother"? "

          DeMelon Christians do love Biblical Mary as a symbol of humbleness and sovereign will of God.
          Christians ABHOR what you did with here and transforming her into horrific, demonic, wicked and blasphemous idol which you call Mediatrix and the Advocate and other blasphemous names that you have stolen from God and assigned to the creature. Here is the answer to your canard "question"

          Is this Mary of the Bible? Is this Biblical Faith on display? —-> http://bit.ly/KOzhAE

          • http://rationalresponses.blogspot.com/ Jeff Dixon

            Despeville:
            Paul spent THREE YEARS in desolate places of Arabia and most likely he was there personally instructed in the Gospel by resurrected Lord of Glory Jesus Christ the Righteous.

            So, you are actually awaiting the third coming then.

          • http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22306708/Jn6.37.png Despeville

            Dodo,

            Please spare us your ignorance dress up in lame mockery.

          • wesley

            you might want to read ii peter where peter gives paul his credibility for his epistles. if it was not for second peter paul's letters and teachings might have been deemed heresy not included in the Bible like the gnostics, arians, and other heretical writings.

          • http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22306708/Jn6.37.png Despeville

            I highly recommend this book as an excellent primer but by no means basic:

            "John Calvin: Pilgrim and Pastor" by Robert Godfrey
            AMAZON: http://amzn.to/JWe20H

          • wesley

            there other legitimate first and second century church writings that we do not find in the Bible. they just did not fit the criteria that the council at Nicaea deemed for canonization. first widely distributed, second connected to an early Apostle, cited by many early church fathers. we only have to two of at least four letters paul wrote to the church of Corinth. we know that because each letter mention a previous letter that we do not have. i timothy is a composite of several of paul's letters to timothy. without peter's legitimizing of paul his letter could have been left out.

          • http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22306708/Jn6.37.png Despeville

            "there other legitimate first and second century church writings that we do not find in the Bible. they just did not fit the criteria that the council at Nicaea deemed for canonization."

            Excuse me but you are massively ignorant and have no idea what are you talking about. Canonization was never a subject in Nicea… Put that Dan Brown away please and start reading real history like starting with this:

            "What Really Happened at Nicea?" ~ http://bit.ly/LeKOrS

          • Dionesius3

            This guy your arguing with will never read anything in the area of serious Biblical scholarship. He loves to be self-important and in the know for that.
            He is a total waste of your time I think.
            He thinks the Gnostic Gospels are real scripture. It takes a moron to fall for that junk.

          • http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22306708/Jn6.37.png Despeville

            Yes, there is lots of morons here and out there same morons – ἐμωρανθησαν [emōranthēsan]) that are mentioned in Romans 1:22

          • wesley

            i am not at talking about the gnostic gospels. i am talking about i and ii clement, shepard of hermas, the epistles of ignatius and polycarp.

          • Dionesius3

            All were not included for valid reasons.
            1. They contributed NOTHING to the Canon.
            2. They brought nothing of note to the message of Scripture.
            3. They were held to be Scripture by only a few.
            4. They dealt with the OT in an inconsistent manner from the rest of Scripture.
            5. They did not have the "ring" of Spirit inspired Scripture.
            6. They left no imprint of lasting and real Grace.

        • lambsev

          Jesus, the Father and the Holy Spirit are one. To be taught by one is to be taught by them all.
          Re Mary, Protestants don't hate her. They may not think highly enough of her, but they do not exalt as deity.
          I'm not a protestant. I believe in God, the Father, the Son Jesus and the Holy Spirit. For me doctrine begins and ends with the Bible, a Book which the Holy Spirit is well able to teach me or anyone who prays for God's truth.
          I don't hate Catholics, but they have elevated Popes, the clergy and Mary above their place in the Kingdom of God, while diminishing the Bible to the level of human authorship by equating it's authority to the authority of men.

          • http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22306708/Jn6.37.png Despeville

            "Jesus, the Father and the Holy Spirit are one."

            No they are not. They are two SEPARATE persons out of the three of the One Eternal God.

        • keyboardshark

          Robert says: "How could St. Paul be taught by my Dear Lord Jesus Christ personally if they only met in the way to Damascus?"

          Paul did not need to speak personally with Jesus Christ. You are forgetting the principle of divine inspiration, which is how the entire Bible was written. It is the action of the Holy Spirit or a revelation from Christ that allows men to write infallible Scripture, not a personal conversation with Christ:

          "Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual."
          1 Corinthians 2:13

          "11 But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.

          12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ."
          Galatians 1:11-12

          "For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost."
          II Peter 1:21

          "For our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance; as ye know what manner of men we were among you for your sake."
          1 Thessalonians 1:5

          "For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God."
          1 Corinthians 2:11

        • Don

          Daniel:

          All you would have to do is read the epistle to the Galatians to know that Paul was a special Apostle who received the message direct from the Lord Jesus.

          • http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22306708/Jn6.37.png Despeville

            Yes he was and that is why he was so crucial in rebuking Judaizers in defending salvation by Grace.

      • wesley

        just read about the anabapists in Munster Germany in the 1530's where where they turn the city into Sodom and Gomorrah through legalized polygamy. the leaders of the town body hung in cages from the church until Hitler had the bones removed.

        • http://twitter.com/lambsev11 @lambsev11

          Care to cite your sources for this, Wesley?

          • wesley

            wikipedia has it. i first learn about it from a Christian talk show within the last couple years when the host read it from today in Christian History. i found it interesting that the bones were left in the cages for almost 400 year. that makes hilter in charge of Germany when they are finally removed.

      • wesley

        Paul was taught by Peter and the other Apostles. outside of the Damascus road experience there is no evidence that Paul heard Jesus teach while Peter was there from basically the beginning.

        • http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22306708/Jn6.37.png Despeville

          Paul was taught by Jesus and directly. Here is when, where and how long:

          "But when God, who had set me apart even from my mother’s womb and called me through His grace, was pleased 16 to reveal His Son in me so that I might preach Him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately consult with flesh and blood, 17 nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me; but I WENT AWAY TO ARABIA, and returned once more to Damascus.18 Then THREE YEARS LATER I went up to Jerusalem to become acquainted with Cephas, and stayed with him fifteen days. "

          ~ Galatians 1:15-18 NASB

          • Dionesius3

            I gotta say, you are right in that Paul was instructed by Jesus himself, but I am not at all sure we can say Jesus appeared to him outside the recorded encounter on the Damascus road. What you referred to is an interesting theory, but it is just a theory. The Bible does not record or give mention of "other appearances" of Jesus to Paul beyond the encounter on the road to Damscus. Yes he spent three years in Arabia, but it's folly to assert that he met with Jesus in this journey, other than through other believers whom he met along the way. Unless of course you have some other reliable source from which this theory can be proven.

          • http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22306708/Jn6.37.png Despeville

            Yes, this theory but please do understand that there is more to it. Early church had widely known understanding that this is precisely what Paul was in deserts of Arabia for three years…

          • Dionesius3

            I would like to know where you read that, I would love to do some more research in this area. It's a pet project of mine, learning more about the early traditions surrounding Paul.

          • http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22306708/Jn6.37.png Despeville

            He went to Arabia (v. 17b). This was after his initial ministry in Damascus (Acts 9:19–20). Instead of “conferring with flesh and blood,” Paul gave himself to study, prayer, and meditation, and met with the Lord alone. He may have spent the greater part of three years in Arabia (Gal. 1:18), and no doubt was involved in evangelism as well as personal spiritual growth. The Apostles had received three years of teaching from the Lord Jesus, and now Paul was going to have his own opportunity to be taught of the Lord. "

            Wiersbe, Warren W.: The Bible Exposition Commentary. Wheaton, Ill. : Victor Books, 1996, c1989, S.
            Ga 1:16

            1:16b-17. Paul had emphasized that he did not receive his message from men before or at the time of his conversion. Now he affirmed that he was free from human influences afterward as well. Though Paul met other Christians after his conversion he did not consult them on doctrine. If he had been uncertain about the gospel, he could readily have gone to Jerusalem for a seminar with the apostles, but he did not. Rather he went immediately into Arabia. It is doubtful that he went there to evangelize but rather to be away from men and alone with the Lord for personal study, meditation, and to receive further revelation. This zealous student of the Law now pondered the meaning of his conversion and looked for the things concerning Christ in the Old Testament (cf. Luke 24:27). The product of these days in Arabia was the Christian theology that Paul explained in his epistle to the Romans.
            The point of Paul’s declaration is clear. He formed his theology not by consulting with others, but independently as he sought God’s guidance.

            Walvoord, John F. ; Zuck, Roy B. ; Dallas Theological Seminary: The Bible Knowledge Commentary : An Exposition of the Scriptures. Wheaton, IL : Victor Books, 1983-c1985, S. 2:592

          • Dionesius3

            I have read that one from Wiersbe, and got the chance to talk with him about it in person. He backed away from the literal Jesus appearing, ie… In fact he said in the next printing that was one thing he was going to clear up. I will look into the Walvoord commentary one, it is a fascinating subject that has been of interest to me since Divinity School. I almost did my Master's thesis on the subject.

          • http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22306708/Jn6.37.png Despeville

            There are sources out there about Early Church believing in this. I have to look through my library as I cannot remember where did I read that stated that way. I will get back to you on that. Jesus appeared many times after Resurrection and about twelve or so different appearings are recorded in NT. There is no reason to not think that if He personally taught Paul in Arabian desert that those appearings wouldn't be classified as such i.e. early post Resurrection appearings nor did He have to be with Paul 24/7 for three years either.

          • Dionesius3

            Yes, I agree there were other appearances and that if he did appear to Paul at this time it did not have to be a 24/7 kind of thing. The position is the same as what Wiersbe and I talked about, but when pressed he did state that he couldn't really defend the belief. And it wasn't an advasarial kind of discussion, just a friendly one. He encouraged me to pursue my Thesis on the subject, but after several weeks of searching on his part he couldn't find any early writers who had stated it that way. I couldn't either, in fact the earliest mention of it I could find came from the Tenth Century A.D.
            Like I said its a hobby of mine that I have been pursuing for many years, there are some other interesting ideas and theories about Paul that can take a lifetime of study to even begin to unravel.
            Thanks,

      • james

        A little heavy on the hand, but Amen brother.

    • http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22306708/Jn6.37.png Despeville

      "Perhaps every Protestant should to investigate the Catholic Faith very deep and without prejudices "

      VERSUS:

      "find that everything is true and that elder Protestants were lying."

      That is so terribly wrong DeMelon that you cannot take your own "advice" seriously… Reading a real work from Reformers would also help your sick and astonishing igorance.

      "Catholic Faith it’s true just because Our Dear and Sweet Jesus Christ founded upon His Apostles with St. Peter as the first of the Apostles."

      DeMelon the problem is that your Roman Catholicism is not true and your "Sweet Jesus" running errands for his mama Mary while sitting politely in her lap is not Jesus of the Bible but a vain and damning idol representing your damning pseudo gospel of works. Peter was not your pope either just look at this picture here:
      http://bit.ly/Lk1ue8

      Are you going seriously maintain that this puppet has anything to do with Peter? Really?

      "he Catholic Christian and Roman Church is just one. The Protestant “churches” are a lot – too many we should say. The Catholic Christian and Roman Church have 20 Centuries. The Protestant “churches” – founded by men – are thousands and only have a little less than 5 centuries. "

      DeMelon you lie and lie and there is no fear of God in your damned heart. None whatsoever. How many times did I tell you that the thousands denomination number from is bogus and false for it counts all kinds of spiritists in in even open heretics like JWs and how many times did I tell you that the same source that is " World Christian Encyclopedia" by David B. Barrett, George T. Kurian, and Todd M. Johnson states that there are 242 that TWO HUNDRED FORTY TWO ROMAN CATHOLIC DENOMINATIONS and that Roman religion MURDERED ALMOST FIVE MILLION CHRISTIANS? Yet that you will not quote for there is no truth in you and you serve "Sweet Jesus mama's boy" who is an idol and can omly damn you as you are indeed damned.

      More and for the reader on bogus 30,000 "Protestant denominations" shenanigans propagated by Roman propaganda whose lie DeMelon bought into hook, kine and sinker:

      http://www.philvaz.com/apologetics/a120.htm

    • petroskhan1262

      I've said before, and will say again, the catholic church is a tool of Satan. It is the single greatest threat to true Christianity in the world, and a fountain of blasphemies and abominations.

      You claim: "The Catholic Church has the Bible as the main basis for our Faith." Show me where in the Bible it condones the sort of grotesque self-aggrandizement we see among the clergy of the catholic church.

      "We are nurturing from the Bible, the Word of the Lord, from the Apostles’ successors and their teachings – coming from the Bible as well and not from men." Really? Where in the Bible does it say that the pope is God? Where does the Bible say that any mere man is perfect and infallible?

      The catholic church is a prostitute, pandering to anyone and everyone, adopting pagan customs in defiance of the Word of God, for no other reason than to attract followers and gain more worldly wealth, all the while losing sight of the real treasures to be gained by adhering to the Words of our Creator.

    • http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22306708/Jn6.37.png Despeville

      DeMelon,

      Do yourself a favor and educate yourself starting with this fairly short work which is way beyond the pamphlets you have been fed with by your priests. This book as an excellent primer but by no means basic and it will do you good to hear the other side and in scholastic fashion too:

      "John Calvin: Pilgrim and Pastor" by Robert Godfrey
      AMAZON: http://amzn.to/JWe20H

    • Bob Koomans

      The Catholic Church has not been truly "christian" since the few hundred years after Constantine made the edict to allow Sun-Worshippers "another day" (prophetic warning against such) on – Obviously: Sunday (Dies Solaris). Eventually the club of Sun-Worshippers took total control of that originally Christian church, and eventually began to abuse those who questioned the errors creeping into that church, ending up in slaughtering those objectors. WW2 saw the Papacy support, benignly, old Hitler, against scriptural advice. The Papacy makes no great secret of that, and sneers at those churches who follow ITS rules against God's ORDERS ( 2nd, and 4th. Commandments illustrate how what and why.) – So Christian churches who fell into line with the Popes edicts of the times, paid homage to the Popes of the days, while in practice defying and insulting THE Most High God and Creator of this World…. God gave mman ONLY 1 day as an official rest day to show respect and honour due to HIM. Any other day sequence is another's day, NOT God's. SO: it is no great surprise that Calvinists take sides with the Papacy, as their ancestors had already capitulated to the pope, and forgot what God Commanded. And YET, God still asks them to REPENT and "come out of Babylon" (meaning their confused state of who they pay honour to).

      • wesley

        Christians worshiping on Sunday started in the early church. Paul mentions tells the church at Corinth to set aside their gifts on the first day of the week. so what do you call the days of the week for everyday is named after pagan gods? Thursday for Thor, Saturday for Saturn, etc.

        • wesley

          in Malachi 4:2 has the name Sun of Righteousness for Christ. "But unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in his wings; and ye shall go forth, and grow up as calves of the stall."

  • Stephen Feinstein

    To be honest, this was a rant, nothing more. Society will be transformed by people preaching the gospel to the lost. The unregenerate man, according to Romans 8:5-8, is unable to submit to God's law. So passing laws will not change the heart. Preaching the gospel and calling the lost to repentance can do just that. Through regeneration, people are born again into a new creation with the ability to please and obey God. It is from there that they receive new desires and begin to hate the things God hates. They will then vote for the morally right options. But to spend too much time in secular politics is to do things backward. The bottom line is Calvinism is the most Scriptural position, across the nation it is the Calvinist churches that spend a lot of time teaching their people Biblical doctrine, and therefore it is the Calvinist churches that are going out and saving the lost. That is not to say that Arminians are not doing this too, but they typically do man-made and man-centered alter calls. Their churches preach topically rather than expositionally, and as a result, their people think a lot like the world. The author should not be knocking the New Calvinists, but instead he should be praising God that through them millions of people are actually interested in digging deep in the doctrines of soteriology, Christology, etc. Furthermore, I read that article in 2009 from Time. I typically hate Time magazine, however, their representation of religion in America was actually spot on. I was impressed. As a seminary educated pastor, I rarely see a case where a worldly and liberal publication accurately reports on Christianity. In this one case, Time actually showed that it was paying attention. They may be using the truth as a manipulative tool for globalism, and shame on them if they are, but we cannot say they were wrong in their description of what is happening in American Christianity. I found the article here to be shortsighted and nothing more than one man's rant. I stand with you in opposing liberal ideology, but if you are taking stabs at Al Mohler, then I would like to see you sit next to him, open up the Bible, and let's see who really knows what is inside God's Word.

    • Robert De Leon

      Stephen:
      Jehovah Witnesses knock from door to door as well. Calvinism and "Witnesses" only spread lies everywhere based in a personal interpretation from the Bible. The Bible was inspired by the Holy Spirit not by men as Calvin did.
      Robert.

      • Alfred

        Could you please give examples of the "lies" that John Piper, RC Sproul, Al Mohler, etc. are spreading everywhere? That is a very slanderous statement that you are making. If you are going to make such statement, you had better be prepared to defend it.

        • Robert De Leon

          Alfred:
          It would take too long to write it but just go to next passages from the Bible, read it carefully and meditate it:
          Matthew, 5:20; 7:16-27; and 25:31-46
          Luke, 13:13-14
          Paul, Phillipians, 2:12-13
          James, 2:14-26
          John, 6:47-66
          Luke, 22:19-20
          Pauil, 1 Corinthians, 11:27-30
          What John Calvin did is to misunderstood what our Dear Lord Jesus Christ said just because he was an evil man and a heretic. He defied Pope's authorithy and then he became a theocrat, ruling as a dictator.
          There are much more in the Bible but in the meantime it's enough.
          Robert.

          • Alfred

            You completely dodged my request to provide evidence of lies spoken by the modern church leaders.

            I would also like to know what Calvin did that was evil and heretical? If your definition of evil and heretical is pointing out where the Roman Catholic church was in contradiction with the Bible, then I can see your point, for he was very good at that.

            You also are either ignorant of history or a bold face liar to say that Calvin was a "theocrat, ruling as a dictator", that is a worn out lie that has been proven wrong countless times.

          • wesley

            i am not sure about Calvin, but anabaptist ran a muck in Muster Germany in the 1530's turning the society into Sodom and Gomorrah. or look at the Puritans, also anabaptists, in England the 17th century where a civil war was fought between the Puritan leaders of parliment and King Charles I and those loyal to him just because he gave Catholics positions in government.

          • Alfred

            Now that's a straw man argument if I ever heard one.

            The article is talking about modern Calvinists, and your talking about Anabaptists in Germany???

            If know basic Engilsh you would know that the prefix ana- means against. So Anabaptists were the opposite of Baptists who just so happen to be the main people being criticized in this article. If you don't know what you're talking about, it's best not to post.

          • Eric

            Actually, "ana" means "again" not against. They were "re-baptizers" in the sense of denying the baptism of their "youth," i.e. infant baptism. Modern Baptists are anabaptist in their beliefs (on baptism at least). We have simply shortened it to Baptist.

          • Eric

            Oh, and wesley is correct about the Anabaptists in Munster, especially culminating in Thomas Muntzer and the Peasant's Revolt in 1525.

          • http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22306708/Jn6.37.png Despeville

            "I would also like to know what Calvin did that was evil and heretical?"

            What he freed the Gospel and a real one to western civilization and again when it was closely locked in the Roman temples and superseded with their whoring for their lucre. That is why they hate him so much and sent their Jesuit dogs after him.

          • http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22306708/Jn6.37.png Despeville

            DeMelon you are a default robot with a default cheat sheet with Scriptural references that do not support any of your damning lies and abuse of the Word for the sake of your nefarious satanic religion and idolatrous rituals os syncretism.

            Is this Biblical Faith on display? —-> http://bit.ly/KOzhAE

          • http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22306708/Jn6.37.png Despeville

            DeMelon

            Look at this portrayal of your Roman Catholic demon of Mary —-> http://bit.ly/KXBeHo

          • petroskhan1262

            I would say that defying the pope was the first step towards wisdom and enlightenment. I shall have to read more about Calvin. He sounds like he might have been on the right track.

          • http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22306708/Jn6.37.png Despeville

            He was for the most part. I highly recommend this book as an excellent primer but by no means basic:

            "John Calvin: Pilgrim and Pastor" by Robert Godfrey
            AMAZON: http://amzn.to/JWe20H

          • Pastor Dwayne

            Robert,,, which pope was it ? One that killed other want to be popes so he could be THE pope or who ?
            By the way , you never answered a question I asked you a long time ago,,,, Since Peter was the Apostle to the Jews , how did he become a " pope to a gentile church that was established many, many years after the Catholic church of the East was established!
            By the way , there is no proof according to the Word that Peter was ever in Rome

          • wesley

            read I Peter which is written in Rome for to the Jews not only was Babylon Babylon, but so was Susa before the Greeks conquered and then Babylon became Alexandria, Egypt and i think Damascus while the Ptolemies and Seleucids fought for power before the Maccabean revolt which can all be found in Daniel's vision in Daniel 11 two to three hundred years before it all happened. when the Romans took over Judea and Sumeria Babylon became Rome. now you can see how Saint Peter ended up in Rome.

          • Dionesius3

            That is without a doubt the biggest bunch of crap logic ever spouted by a "thinking" person.
            Where do you find this fairy tale in Scripture? You can't because it is not there.
            Peter was not the first pope, because the Roman Catholic church did not exist in his lifetime.
            It did not exist for many years after his death.
            Wake up from your slumber thou sluggard and go to the ant. Learn some real history before you make a complete fool of yourself.

          • wesley

            i never mentioned that Peter was the first pope all i was doing was helping to show how Peter truly died go and die at Rome. i do see where my Catholic brother get Jesus installing Peter as the first pope. you can find it if yourself if you are truly willing to learn in Matthew 16:13-20. they use verses 18-19. i do not agree with my Catholic brothers about their interpretation about Peter becoming the first pope. it is not heretical as you Calvinists seem to think. what is really heretical in the belief that satan can duplicate anything that God does like raise the beast in Revelation from the dead. satan's power is like that of the wizard in the Wizard of Oz for it is only in the mind of the weak minded.

          • Dionesius3

            Are you a dispensational premillennialist?

          • wesley

            no for I have awaken from my slumber. In Jesus' own word "one taken and the other left." Jesus' audience there on the Mount of Olives would understand exactly what Jesus meant for the one taken was young and bright or strong for males and beautiful and preferably a virgin for females. just like Daniel was for they would be spoils of war. the men would live as slaves and the women would become wives and concubines. the one left behind would have been old and feeble just not worth taking. what is it about THIS GENERATION WILL NOT PASS AWAY do you not get?! all you are doing is confirming a skeptic skepticism. Revelation lines up with with the Jewish revolt. the seven churches of Revelation no longer exist for those cities do not exist with Smyrna falling in just 1922. you have noticed that every time a year was used to "restart God prophetic clock" generation have come and gone. 1917 Balfour Declaration that generation is almost as small as the generation that was able to see the Cubs win a World Series with a majority who would not old enough to even remember it. how about 1948 Israel being reborn, Israel will see its 70 birthday before the end of the decade. maybe 1967 Jerusalem is reunited under Jewish rule, wait 40 years have already come and gone. the policy has become if the year don't fit more it to one that still can fit. everyone one who pushes it has done this Hal Lynsey, Tim LaHay, Chuck Smith. they can get away with it just because that are not as dogmatic about the date as Harold Camping was. the biggest supporters of this system are getting old!!

          • wesley

            Dionesius i think i will save you the time.

            This is a bunch of crap.
            Learn some real history not some fairy tale history.

            Is that good enough?

          • Dionesius3

            O.K. I see, your completely insane.
            Sorry to bother you.

          • http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22306708/Jn6.37.png Despeville

            Dispensationalism is a bunch of man made myths about 160 years old verging or encapsulating elements of Gnosticism.

          • PastorDwayne

            Peter dieing in rome is pure heresay

          • http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22306708/Jn6.37.png Despeville

            "dieing"

            Did you mean "dining"?

      • Daniel Heisner

        Everyone interprets the Bible even you. What matters is that the interpretation is based on sound hermeneutical principles. Calvin's teachings are supported by scripture. The interpretations of the Witnesses are not.

        • Robert De Leon

          Daniel:
          As I said it before, the Holy Bible was inspired by the Holy Spirit. No one has the right to interpret it by his/her own. That applies to John Calvin and the rest of "deformer" Protestants.
          Robert.

          • bighoss

            Did these people have a right to interpret the Bible for themselves?

            Acts 17:11
            King James Version (KJV)
            11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

            Was the young man Timothy in error when he followed this instruction from the apostle Paul?

            2 Timothy 2:15
            King James Version (KJV)
            15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

            Let the Holy Mother Cult interpret scripture for you, Robert and allow yourself to be fed from that corrupt spoon if you wish. But be advised, there is a lot of toxic stuff in that ration.

          • http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22306708/Jn6.37.png Despeville

            But it does not apply to your Pharaohs/popes one of them in display in his way to hell:

            http://bit.ly/Lk1ue8

          • http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22306708/Jn6.37.png Despeville

            DeMelon,

            What is "deformed" is only the Gospel in your pagan religion of Rome. That is why you worship idols and fake "Sweet Jesus the mama's boy". Look at this portrayal of your Roman Catholic demon of Mary —-> http://bit.ly/KXBeHo

  • Steve

    Interesting article and insights. I would like to know more about the doctrinal tenats to which this "New Calvinism" adheres. The lack of a message or statement of docrinal faith, though, in the face of creeping one-world globalism and syncretistic influences from a culture that is rapidly becoming, and has already become in many ways, a post-Christian society, speaks loudly in support of the author's premise.

    • Alfred

      What you and this guy fail to see is that the "Neo-Calvinists" are not new at all. They are more like a resurgent movement that originally started with Augustine in the 400s and then was rediscovered by Calvin and Luther at the Reformation.

      It is not a specific denomination, it is a movement within the denominations. If you want to know what they believe, in general, you can look at the Westminster Catechism or the Heidelberg Catechism. There is a full spectrum of people and beliefs within the movement. From the Presbyterian R.C. Sproul to the Southern Baptist Mohler, the the Charismatic C. J. Mahaney. These are people from all different denominations getting back to the origin of the essential teachings of the Scriptures.

      • Steve

        Thank you for the snapshot of illumination. As an apparent apologist for this particular movement, what neither you nor others responding to this article have done is to refute the last paragraph, and in particular the last sentence, of the article.

        The author may be accurate or he may have missed it, but he does deserve a response that can confirm or refute his fundamental assertion. While the church (the body of Christ in general) has its corporate citizenship in heaven it has its feet planted in this earth and if it remains silent in the face of a cultural drift toward modern day syncretism with the goal of going along to get along then it will be faced with some stark choices in the not too distant future.

        • Alfred

          I am certainly not an apologist, I'm just a farmer who is easily distracted by internet debates on rainy days. I didn't respond to it, because it is a false premise. I would even go so far as to say that it is a straw man argument.

          Everyone I know who is reformed (that is what we prefer to be called. The term Calvinist is usually used by our detractors) is quite politically active. Dr. Mohler is one of the most vocal critics of the rot within our culture. RC Sproul Sr. (and Jr.) both have strong political views that have made them many enemies. Locally we have a small reformed college here in Idaho called New Saint Andrews, its leader is Douglas Wilson who is the most outspoken person for a biblical world view in our entire state. To put it mildly he has become quite a lightening rod.

          So, to put it in technical terms, his last statement is pure hogwash.

          • http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22306708/Jn6.37.png Despeville

            I highly recommend this book as an excellent primer but by no means basic:

            "John Calvin: Pilgrim and Pastor" by Robert Godfrey
            AMAZON: http://amzn.to/JWe20H

  • George

    According to Calvin this gentleman had no choice but to write this article. The problem is to many American Christians have been taught to accept Jesus rather than follow Him in submission as Lord. The fact Calvin and Luther had a problem with James Letter to the Church is based in the fact that James said 'the demons accept who Jesus is and are afraid' that means that accepting Jesus is different than following Him. When we follow Jesus we submit with heart, soul, mind and strength to Him of our own free will. Many cultures that have multiple gods accept Jesus (even America) because what is one more god among many. The idea of following Jesus means that 'You shall have no other gods' that He is the Alpha and Omega the beginning and the end. This idea is the narrow gate and if Jesus is not the only Lord and Savior then He is not either for you or me and we will end up as a 'people whoring after other gods'. It is time to put away the notion that we are in and can't get out or out and can't get in and begin by surrendering our lives to Jesus. The truth is Jesus always said 'follow Me' not accept Me and we need to proclaim this truth. I suggest for all a re-read of the Gospels with this thought in mind, it is not God forcing us to follow Jesus but calling us to do so.

    • Daniel Heisner

      Both"'accepting" and "following" are preceded by God's call. "No one can come to me unless the Father draws him." Our salvation, in no way, is dependent on our own effort. "It does not, therefore, depend on man's desire or effort, but on God's mercy." It is "not by works ,but by him who calls." This is the biblical way; "… if you confess with your mouth, 'Jesus is Lord' and believe in you heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. Anyone who trusts in him will never be put to shame."

      • George

        So you are saying the Apostle Peter was wrong? The calling of God comes from the preaching of the Word. 'How will they believe unless they hear and how shall they hear without a preacher' the Apostle Paul. Why would Jesus say repent if you couldn't decide too? All acceptance is not following, I accept that sky diving is fun and yet I don't jump out of airplanes. If you theology is correct then what is the point of living the life? Because no matter what I am in our out and as you say can't have any effect on that outcome. It's a handy theology for why Christians or those who call themselves such don't do most of the things God ask of them.

        • Pastor Dwayne

          George, there is a lot of church goers out there that follow the Lord that doesn't have a clue what the born again experience is !! Robert De leon is one.

          • http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22306708/Jn6.37.png Despeville

            So do we have to speak in tongues to have that "experience" or total and complete trust in Christ and His righteousness and His promises in life and in death is enough?

    • wesley

      it is true it takes more than right believing to be saved it also requires right living for James says "faith without works is dead. I will show you my faith through my works." i expect to see Mother Theresa in heaven for she saw the poor, the sick, and lepers as Jesus. she took Jesus serious when he said "whatever you do to the least of these you do unto me." i believe that Luther's largest problem with James was all the talk about works.

      • George

        Amen Brother

        • Pastor Dwayne

          Still gets to one thing, in the Lord's eyes righteous works being done in a non-born again person is as filthy rags! just because you do righteous works doesn't mean faith is at work

          • wesley

            it depends on what you call born again. is it a change of heart or just saying the "sinner's prayer"? there those who have said the "sinner's prayer" and are living deeper in sin than before they said it. when the adulterous woman was brought to Jesus and all her accusers had left he tells her that she is no longer condemned and that she needs to go and sin no more. you can find the social gospel in Matthew 25 in the parable of sheep and the goats. for whatever you do or don't do to the least of these you have either did or did not do unto me. you can not get around the clear wording of the text.

          • http://www.facebook.com/people/John-Crowder/100003089905700 John Crowder

            The trouble with the "sinner's prayer" is that there is not a single case in the New Testament of any lost sinner being told to say that canned "sinner's prayer" that is so often entreated upon those seeking salvation.

    • http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22306708/Jn6.37.png Despeville

      "According to Calvin this gentleman had no choice but to write this article."

      You have no idea what are you talking about…

    • Kalev

      Thank you George, many good points you have made, praise YHVH, praise Yeshua!

  • Gordon

    Calvin may be a factor for some, but the real answer is being baptized into Christ by faith, Who then baptizes us with the Holy Spirit and then in the reconnection of fellowship with God the Father we walk in obedience as we are guided into all truth. Anything less, anything else is dead works, flesh and just more religion!

  • Terri

    The article didn't explain what the new Calvinism is and the relationship to the gentlemen in the article. What are the gentlemen currently doing? Does Mohler run Southern Baptists? Total waste of time.

  • Winston

    Herein lies the problem with the author of the article. While you can read the surface information what about what is left out – obvious to those who are sincere Biblical Christians. First, the author throws out three names of supposedly the players in this movement include John Piper, Mark Driscoll, and Al Mohler. What's wrong with this? Biblically there are many local church pastors wrongly jumping on their bandwagon as "followers" of John Calvin … swallowing everything these guys (and more – including Rich Warren, Joel Osteen, etc.) say…and by doing so taking their entire flock down the sinful road of becoming "followers of men" which the Bible distinctly warn against. Then, there's the mention of the so-called Evangelical Conservative Calvinists falling for a "worldview" instead of a "Biblical Worldview". Subtle, yet deceptive. Do not be deceived. Pray for spiritual discernment. Become a true watchman on the wall for Jesus Christ and not succumb ignorantly to be a man-follower heading straight to hell with the father of lies, Satan.

    • Sonny

      Winston, said, "Then, there's the mention of
      the so-called Evangelical Conservative
      Calvinists falling for a "worldview" instead of
      a "Biblical Worldview". Subtle, yet
      deceptive."

      Winston, what in the world are you talking about!? How is it that the Evangelical Conservative Calvinist is falling for a worldview instead of a biblical worldview -whatever that means?

      • Winston

        Sonny, if you have to ask for clarification it is clear you may not digest the meaning. A person with a "worldview" should be perceived to be secular, not Christian, for to have a "Biblical worldview" implies that person is a sincere Biblical Christian and lives "being" a Christian in all that they are and do in life…not just on Sunday mornings in a church.

  • lambsev

    If you ask me what needs reformation is the soul of man. God will take care of the church, those called by Him to believe. In the end the goats will be taken away. The sheep will enter the Kingdom and Rome will not be their capital.

    • http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22306708/Jn6.37.png Despeville

      For whom Christ died then???

      …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..Sheep and Sheep only as He says in John 10:15 among other places.

      • http://twitter.com/lambsev11 @lambsev11

        Do I detect the tulip theology here?

        "Calvinism emphasized divine sovereignty and free grace; Arminianism emphasized human responsibility. The one restricts the saving grace to the elect; the other extends it to all men on the condition of faith. Both are right in what they assert; both are wrong in what they deny. If one important truth is pressed to the exclusion of another truth of equal importance, it becomes an error, and loses its hold upon the conscience. The Bible gives us a theology which is more human than Calvinism and more divine that Arminianism, and more Christian than either of them." Phillip Schaff

        • wesley

          that is so true. even it we take all the traditions of Protestants, Catholic, and Orthodox together we are still just scratching the surface of the treasure found in the Gospel. it is just like with each now telescope the universe is just gets bigger and bigger for we see more stars and galaxies that have been there since the dawn of time we have never seen it before.

        • http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22306708/Jn6.37.png Despeville

          Detect this: A very different thing… http://bit.ly/tcT6Mj

  • Walt

    A bride wants to be known by here husbands name, as the Christian church we are the bride of Christ and I take with honor and respect my Husbands name Jesus Christ that is why I call myself a Christian. Not a pentecostal, Baptist, Methodist, Catholic, etc. Maybe those who identify as such love the religion more than Christ Himself.

  • wesley

    i am guessing many of the respondents are Calvinist. i think the author got it right when he proposed the question to this article. i think most Calvinist will find it but this is a new calvinism for old calvinist used to believe that social change came from the bottom up which takes years and years of work. this will make calvin either post- or amillennial. St. Augustine was an amillenialist Calvin's favorite Saint.

    • wesley

      after reading some responses in the Popes War on the Church i would have to say propaganda tool for it seems from a few of those responses that it might be a theological movement with little understanding of theology. the doctrine of Original Sin an abominable doctrine. not knowing that baptist were originally called anabaptist. no wonder the authors of either the time article or this could give any doctrinal examples for it is hard to come up with them.

    • nursepat

      Whatever denominational label you wear will either blow off on the way up or burn off on the way down. Walt is right—the only one we owe allegiance to is the Bridegroom, Jesus Christ. While I am far from perfect I try to follow what He would have me do. I know Christ as the ONLY way to come to God; anyone that claims any other way is a deceiver and the truth is not in him. Jesus Himself said "I am the way, the truth, and the light; no man can come to the father but through me."

  • ORB

    What was the point of this rambling article?

  • http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22306708/Jn6.37.png Despeville

    For whom Christ DIED?

    John 1015 NASB© " even as the Father knows Me and I know the Father; and I lay down My life for the sheep. "

  • Dionesius3

    Good one Despeville, but I'm not sure you will get any takers on the bait.
    It goes right over most of their heads.

    • http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22306708/Jn6.37.png Despeville

      Yes it does but not over yours… :) Now take that right to John 17:19 for it says the same thing and all over again which falls on so many deaf ears.

      • Dionesius3

        No it doesn't go over my head for sure, I understand what your saying. I believe almost exactly as you, we have much more in common than even you know. But I don't think there are many here in this site who understand…

    • http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22306708/Jn6.37.png Despeville

      A very different thing… http://bit.ly/tcT6Mj

      • Dionesius3

        By the way, this guy Wesley your talking to is a complete lunatic.

        • http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22306708/Jn6.37.png Despeville

          I don't know that yet as I have not really interacted with him that much…

  • Rickirish

    People follow Jesus in faith because faith is a fruit of His Spirit Gal.5:22. It is worked in them by God. We find some men following Jesus, because 1Co 3:9 For we are labourers together with God: ye are God's husbandry, ye are God's building. And: Act 13:48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed. Salvation & a will to follow God is His doing, to His credit, honor & Glory. Stop presenting the gosple as something that is up to man to choose, follow or believe. If & when we want to follow Jesus; God has worked it to be this way for we are His sheep. NO CREDIT TO MAN. ALL GLORY TO GOD. Live this way, think this way, honor God's word, accepting His choices. Joh 6:44 No one can come to Me unless the Father who has sent Me draw him, and I will raise him up at the last day.
    Joh 6:45 …" Therefore everyone who hears and learns from the Father comes to Me.
    Joh 6:65 … no one can come to Me unless it was given to him from My Father.

  • LWH

    Well put Jesse. Now, I doubt many of the mindless morons of America will understand more than 2% of your article but bravo for telling it like it is!

  • John

    Excellent article. Why not mention the more vibrant strand of Christian Reconstruction? Joel McDurman, a rising star in this movement, for example often speaks out against the highly centralized and militaristic American Empire.

    • Vladimir

      America may becoming centralized (to its detriment), but a militaristic American Empire? Sounds like Joel McDurmon is another self-promoting donation magnet like Weiland.