Calvinism: The Place To Turn In Times Of Despair

I found this article inspiring showing where some turn in times of despair.  At the tender age of 15, Shawn Vickers was informed he had HIV.  Being born with hemophilia, a genetic disorder that prevents blood clotting, Vickers had been treated with transfusions of clotting factor from blood donors  >>>

Unfortunately, sixteen years ago when Shawn was accepting blood transfusions, there were no systematic screenings for HIV contaminated blood.  Hence, Shawn contracted the known killer through such blood.   To make matters even more heartbreaking, he tested positive for hepatitis C, which attacks the liver.  That was the final blow pushing Shawn's life into a tailspin.  The news was so devastating, his Mother encouraged him to quit High School and just 'enjoy life' for the meager time he had left.

Shawn's spiritual heritage was within the classical Pentecostal Church.  He initially responded by turning to his faith, expecting a miraculous healing to be given. He prayed for it and even went to healing crusades to get it all for naught.  Nothing changed.   

Shawn stumbled across a radio show by noted theologian and Reformed author, R. C. Sproul.  All that Sproul said made good sense to him (Reading Sproul avidly for several years, I can attest precisely to what Shawn testifies).

Subsequently, Shawn found a Church in Springfield that taught very similarly to Sproul's view.  In short, a distraught, distressed young man found peace and hope in the teachings of Calvinism. Moving.

Shawn's story is not unique.  Many do find rest in Calvinism's relentless focus on a God Whose Sovereignty allows not one single fiber out of place in this vast Universe.  Yet, from my perspective, having embraced the comfort Calvinism offers like our young friend now enjoys, I neither perceive nor experience any less comfort or peace in my, shall we say, post-Calvinism Christianity, than I enjoyed in my happy-be-your-day Calvinism.  In other words, I did not lose moving away from strong, systematic Calvinism; to the contrary, the way I see it, I gained. 

The article is very much worth your full attention and, of course, serves as a marvelous anecdote to those who always see nothing good at all in Calvinist Christianity. 

As a finishing note, the article contains a sidebar that summarizes the TULIP.  For my part, the only petal on the flower that any evangelical Arminian would challenge, as it is written, is the fifth--the perseverance of the saints--and that, only by some Arminians. 

Many Arminians historically have never challenged the security of the believer beginning with James Arminius himself who only noted difficulties with certain passages (Who hasn't?).  With the first four points in the petal as written there, most Arminians would agree.  Makes one wonder what all the hoopla is about, doesn't it?

With that, I am...

Peter

Comments

[Steve]

WOW Peter,
Yuou blew me away there.. you subscribe to all 5 points of tulip (as expressed by the sidebar articles)?
could have knocked me over with a feather...
by the way, I have similar problem as I know you do with militant doctrinaire calvinism.. I think it more reflects an insecure faith, than a vibrant reconciled relationship with the Lord and Saviour.
If anything, the hybrid doctrinairres seem to lack assurance...
Steve

[peter]

S

Steve,

I trust your Lord's Day sermon mighty in the Scriptures.

So, you're blown away, ah, my Brother? Well, of course I subscribe to them! But, note I said 'the petal as written there':

• T: "This doesn't mean people are as bad as they can be. It means that sin is in every part of one's being, including the mind and will, so that a man cannot save himself." Absolutely no NonCalvinist evangelical would question this. No one affirms man can save himself, do they?
• U: "God chooses to save people unconditionally; that is, they are not chosen on the basis of their own merit." I asked a well-known Calvinist blogger to name one and only one Evangelical Arminian theologian/teacher who believed God chose men/women based on their own merit. Besides not answering, he threatened to walk me to the door of his blog. I cannot name an Arminian that believes anything other than Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures and it's entirely through His meritorious Work on the Cross that any person can or ever will be saved.
• L: This is a bit tricky. "The sacrifice of Christ on the cross was for the purpose of saving the elect." Indeed it was. NonCalvinists affirm this. Of course, the kicker is, NonCalvinists believe more than not less than this. NonCalvinists believe His blood vicariously shed covered not only the 'elect' but also 'being the Lamb of God', He 'takes away the sin of the world'
• I: "When God has chosen to save someone, He will." Surely. God chooses to save all those who turn from their sin and trust in Christ and will not not save them.
• P: "Those people God chooses cannot lose their salvation; they will
  continue to believe. If they fall away, it will be only for a time." While this is arguably the biggest theological gap between Calvinists and NonCalvinists, it is a gap that is only relative. As I noted in the post earlier, granted it may be that most evangelical Arminians today confessionally affirm 'falling from grace' or 'conditional perseverance', embracing such wholesale historically is not unanimous beginning with Arminius.

Grace, Grosey. With that, I am...

Peter

[grosey]

Thanks Peter,
I see the caveats :)
Steve

[Grosey]

Will you be having caveats with those tulips today sir? May I recommend the non-caveat section of our restaurant?
:)

[peter]

Grosey,

Now, my brother. You realize there's no caveats here--perhaps a spin or two but never caveat. Caveats are our brother Wade's thing:^)

Grace, my friend. With that, I am...

Peter

[Chris Gilliam]

Peter,
As I commented in a previous post, there can be room for two. Your dialog with Grosey proves point. I think if the militant Calvinist and militant Non-Calvanist would focus more on pointing people to Christ as opposed to attempting to bend arm backward force one to their views, then we might start getting some where together.
I must say, I like the creative caligraphy you use to write Tulip on your peice of cake. I hope you can like the block letters I put on my psice of the cake.

Chris

[Chris Gilliam]

Sorry for th typos. "Peice" and "psice" as supposed to read "piece"- Cold hands need hot coffee!

[John Daly]

I believe the "shot heard around the world" was fired by the students of Arminius who developed their five points or remonstrances a year after Jacob died(sp). Jacob was the student of Beza who was the student of Calvin. I don't know much about Beza (nothing really) but if Beza did hold to all of Calvin's teachings, I'm sure young Jacob was certainly a burr in his saddle.

[peter]

Chris,

Do not feal badd abut thi tipoz. THay can happin to enny off uz.

John,

Though I surely am no expert on either Arminius or scholastic Calvinism, I think Beza and Arminius were on differing platforms. At least some of their differences was whether Calvin could be scholastized indicative of Beza's approach.

Grace. With that, I am...

Peter

[J. Dale Weaver]

Peter:

THanks for sharing this article above. It's humorous when I tell Calvinists that I, as an RA (Reformed Arminian) believe wholeheartedly in Calvin's understanding of God's sovereignty and man's depravity.

Of course, so did Arminius! Far too many have learned about Arminius from OTHER Calvinists with an axe to grind, not from actually having read what Arminius wrote. He considered himself a thorough-going "Reformed Christian," believing all the "Sola's" of the Reformation. His enemies, however, simply accused him and the generation or Arminians that followed as "Semi-Pelagians." Quite wrong -- if one takes the time to read the "Remonstrance." The Calvinists at Dort didn't read it, many Calvinists today haven't either. Sad, since we agree on quite a bit more than they give credit for.

You are correct that Arminius never denied Point 5 of TULIP: THe Perseverance of the Saints. He did indeed question it and say it needed further study. The fact that most SB Preachers affirm all that Arminians do, with the exception of Point 5, is fascinating -- and embarrassing to not a few I'd bet.

Point 5 would be better explained in terms of Reformed Arminianism as the "Possibility of Apostasy," or at least labeled "Perseverance of the Saints?" But hey -- that's another discussion for another day!

Blessings,

Dale

[peter lumpkins]

Dale,

Thanks for your input. I too have found as you have described: some are quite surprised Arminius affirmed--albeit the necessity of previenient grace--'deadness in sin' apart from Christ every bit as much as the strongest Calvinist.

And, you are correct--the possibility of apostasy is another question...perhaps in a post on Dale Moody ;^)

Peace. With that, I am...

Peter

[volfan007]

peter,

i would humbly suggest that this young man did not find comfort and peace in calvinism, but simply in the bible. if he's trusting in calvinistic theology, then his trust is in the wrong thing.

in all reality, he found comfort and peace in coming out of the pentecostal extremes that he was in, and in understanding the sovereignty of God as set forth in the bible.

of course, my prayer for him is that one day he will grow in his faith to the point to see beyond the five points to just simply see the bible. that he wont do as so many young men who are into five point calvinism as an overreaction. i've seen many, many young men get into the five points because they go from one extreme to the other. they left either a pentecostal background, or else they left a baptist church that was a shallow, almost "arminian," type of church where they never even heard of the doctrines of election and predestination. and so, they tend to go into extreme calvinism as an overreaction.

and really, peter, aint that true about a lot of things in life? people tend to leave one extreme and then go to the other? like, in our church history...all you heard was hellfire and brimstone preaching around these parts where i live. then, the pendulum swung, and all you heard about was the love of God. also, look at all the fads in theology that pastors and churches get into. they go from one thing to the next as being the "most important" things that a church should do. we go from evangelism to missions to feeding the hungry to church growth to seeker friendly to whatevers coming down the creek next. or, its like, a youngster grows up in a drunkards home, sees the harm and damage that alcohol does, and then he's leading the charge against alcohol. you know what i mean.

david