Calvinism. The systematic theology put forth by John Calvin in his magnum opus Institutes of the Christian Religion. The truth is, Calvin got a lot of his theology from Augustine, the Bishop of Hippo in Carthage. Charles Spurgeon was a staunch Calvinist, essentially calling it the gospel. However it came about, Calvin’s systematic theology has become a somewhat of a lighting rod within Christendom today. Some will go so far as to call it heresy.

I believe Calvinism is easily found when one simply reads the bible. I really don’t like using the term “Calvinism” but it is shorthand for understanding where I stand on systematic theology. Total depravity, unconditional election, limited atonement, irresistible grace and perseverance of the saints (TULIP) is clearly evident in scripture. I also believe that it is the combination of both the first two letters that people have a problem coming to grips with.

The other problem people usually have problems with are some who call themselves Calvinists. They can come across as being exceptionally arrogant (James White and Jeff Durbin come to mind). I agree with that assessment, especially among those who fall into the category of Reformed (which I will address in another blogpost). But the problem is with individuals and not with Calvinism, a copout for dismissing Calvinism.

The other approach I see with those who oppose Calvinism is they usually use verses out of context to allegedly debunk Calvinism. One of the most commonly used verses is 2 Peter 3:8-9. I will also deal with this and other verses used in a separate blogpost. Some of these people, like Leighton Flowers, claim to have been former Calvinists but their grasp of the systematic theology is lacking. Sometimes it is very difficult to listen to their podcasts because they simply misrepresent Calvinism by building strawmen arguments. There are plenty of other better qualified people who have done podcasts that have dealt with Mr. Flowers.

As I said previously, I believe the two problems people have with Calvinism are Calvinists and the combination of total depravity and election (and to a lesser extent limited atonement). The latter I will address while the former I cannot help anyone with.

What I am going to attempt to do in a series of articles is to add my miserable two cents to the who debate. I have heard anti-Calvinists poorly represent Calvinism and use bible verses out of context, among other things, that I need to write something that maybe ten people might read. I may not convince anyone but some of the arguments I bring up may be unique, at least I have never read anyone use them before.