Reflections of a Disenchanted Calvinist: The Disquieting Realities of Calvinism

By Ronnie W. Rogers

Reflections of a Disenchanted Calvinist: The Disquieting Realities of Calvinism engages one of the classical strands of Protestant thought with the classical strength of Protestantismshedding the light of the Scriptures on the questions of the faith. Author Ronnie W. Rogers leads readers through the intricacies of Calvinist thought, touching on such topics as the sovereignty of God, predestination, unconditional election, the origin of evil, free will, and faith and works. The intent of this journey is to provide a critique of Calvinism and to present readers with a clear picture of the ramifications of subscribing to Calvinist doctrines.

Chapters address particular theological topics by stating both affirmations rooted in the Scriptures and disaffirmations drawing their support from the Scriptures as well. The lines of thought do not shy away from complex theological questions, but instead rely upon the riches of theological reflection to assure the critiques of Calvinism are fair both to the doctrines and to the Scriptures.

If you are a part of the Calvinist tradition and want to explore the nuances of your background, or if you locate yourself outside of that tradition but have deep curiosity about the questions the Calvinist tradition raises, then Reflections of a Disenchanted Calvinist: The Disquieting Realities of Calvinism offers a rigorous guide to exploring the depths of the tradition and critique of the tenets of Calvinism.

• Language: English
• Publisher: WestBow Press
• Release date: Mar 28, 2016
• ISBN: 9781490889030

Ronnie W. Rogers

Ronnie W. Rogers is pastor of Trinity Baptist Church, Norman, Oklahoma. He holds a BA in Biblical Studies and an MS in Counseling. He is a member of the Oxford Round Table and author of four other books. He has served as president at Arkansas Baptist State Convention; chairman of the Board of Trustees, Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary; and chairman of the nominating committee of the Southern Baptist Convention. He is married with two married daughters and five grandsons.

Book preview

Copyright © 2016 Ronnie W. Rogers

Cover design by Sommer Buss

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be used or reproduced by any means, graphic, electronic, or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, taping or by any information storage retrieval system without the written permission of the author except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical articles and reviews.

All Scripture quoted is from the New American Standard Bible (NASB)

WestBow Press

A Division of Thomas Nelson & Zondervan

1663 Liberty Drive

Bloomington, IN 47403

www.westbowpress.com

1 [phone]

Because of the dynamic nature of the Internet, any web addresses or links contained in this book may have changed since publication and may no longer be valid. The views expressed in this work are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher, and the publisher hereby disclaims any responsibility for them.

Any people depicted in stock imagery provided by Thinkstock are models, and such images are being used for illustrative purposes only.

Certain stock imagery © Thinkstock.

ISBN: 978-1-4908-8902-3 (sc)

ISBN: 978-1-4908-8904-7 (hc)

ISBN: 978-1-4908-8903-0 (e)

WestBow Press rev. date: 03/02/2016

Contents

Dedication

Foreword

Acknowledgements

Introduction

1      Sovereignty of God

2      Predestination and Foreknowledge

3      Double Predestination

4      Origin of Sin

5      Depravity of Man

6      Atonement for Sin

7      Love of God

8      God’s Love in Us

9      Grace

10      World vs. Elect

11      Faith and Regeneration

12      Faith and Works

13      Preaching of the Gospel

14      The Unpardonable Sin

15      Time (Age) of Accountability: Fact or Fiction

16      The Lamb’s Book of Life: Who’s In and Who’s Out?

17      Free Will of Man: Libertarian or Compatibilism

18      Origin of Sin and the Offer of Salvation: THE CONNECTION

19      Does Romans 9 Teach Unconditional Election and Reprobation?

20      Does God Cause Evil?

Glossary of Authorial Terms

Appendix 1

Endnotes

Dedication

I dedicate this book to my two grown daughters, Natalie and Nancy. You have imbued my saunter through this moment of eternity with love, life, honor, and laughter far exceeding the other extraordinary felicities of this life.

FOREWORD

Reflections of a Disenchanted Calvinist is an important book because it is written by an academically-minded pastor who over the span of a dozen years thoroughly investigated and finally abandoned Calvinism. Using the literary device of affirmation and denial, Ronnie Rogers lays out cogently what he accepts and rejects about Calvinism.

Reflections is unlike many other anti-Calvinist treatises, whose authors erect a Calvinist straw man, knock it down, and claim a stunning victory. Instead, Ronnie Rogers writes as a former and knowledgeable Calvinist, i.e. one who has been there, done that. He is precise in his explanation of Calvinistic terms and doctrines, following their traditional and accepted use by Calvinists themselves. Ronnie interacts with such prominent Calvinist authors as R. C. Sproul, Gordon Clark, and John Piper, among others, and allows their writings to speak for themselves.

While Ronnie offers a friendly, but critical analysis of Calvinism, most who embrace this theological system will not be convinced by his argument. In fact, they will likely accuse him of defecting from Calvinism and adopting Arminianism. Such, however, is not the case. The author has simply returned to his spiritual roots as a biblicist and exegete. Ronnie does not believe in an Arminian version of unconditional free-will, but he does believe in a freed will that results from hearing the Gospel.

One message rings loud and clear throughout this book: It is dangerous to read the Scriptures through the lens of a preconceived theological system, albeit Calvinism, Arminianism or Dispensationalism. Rather than imposing our theology upon the text, we should derive our theology from the text, and only then after careful and objective exegesis. Like Ronnie Rogers, I followed a similar spiritual path and came to the same conclusions. So I heartedly recommend this volume to the reader!

However, I must issue a warning: this is not a book for the intellectually faint of heart, who wish to be spoon fed the milk of the Word; it is only for those who desire strong meat. As such its content may be hard to digest. Therefore, you should take small bites and chew thoroughly before swallowing. In following these instructions, you will not only be well-nourished, but spiritually satisfied as well.

R. Alan Streett, Ph.D.

W. A Criswell Chair of Expository Preaching and NT Exegesis

Criswell College

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

If ever a man owed others, it is this man. I am unredeemably in debt, not in the ways of man, but in love having been shown to me by others (Romans 13:8). This book is the product of many years of being taught by other’s books, lives and reflecting upon Scripture and the teachings of Calvinism. Especially the host of godly authors and teachers who’s Calvinism I no longer subscribe to are in a very special way mentors whom I shall always be a debtor.

I would like to thank all who had a part in the preparation of this book: the college students whom I have been honored to pastor who never tire of asking me questions regarding the deep things of Scripture, Anita Charlson for her graciously superb and indefatigable oversight and editing of the manuscript without which the project would have been too daunting to even consider, JR Crosby for invaluable suggestions for the cover design, the elders for their unwavering support of my commitment to study, untiring encouragement to equip the saints and write and my brothers and sisters at Trinity Baptist Church who have loved me without measure and provided me the greatest opportunity for spiritual growth and to help them and others to do the same.

I will always be indebted to all of you for your love and support.

INTRODUCTION

In the years that I have been pastoring, I have been asked on incalculable occasions to explain what I believe about Calvinism, the Lamb’s book of life, the age of accountability, the unpardonable sin, the doctrines of sovereignty, God’s love, predestination, election, foreknowledge, man’s choice, or other related issues. Therefore, since I began writing these answers in response to questions regarding my belief, I put this book in the format of what I affirm and disaffirm. These affirmations and disaffirmations contrast what non-Calvinists and Calvinists believe as well as what I call the disquieting realities of Calvinism. Interest in these issues has been particularly pronounced during my years of pastoring Trinity Baptist Church. This interest, and my desire to lead the church in truth, precipitated the formulation of my thoughts into a concise and easily accessible format that allows one to read about all of the related areas or just about the doctrine or issue with which they are concerned at the time.

Consequently, I am writing primarily to the flock whom I love dearly and whom God is allowing me to shepherd. One day I will give an account for them, something I take very seriously. Within our church, there are both young and mature Christians, and I am writing with both in mind. Further, I am writing at times from a rather theologically technical perspective in order to make sure that I do not misrepresent actual teachings or inevitable conclusions of Calvinism; however, at times I am trying to deal with germane issues to allow others to understand some of the serious consequences, as I see them, of Calvinism.

Therefore, if one misses my audience at a particular point, he might be inclined to construe an argument as a straw man. However, to the best that I am able, I have presented an accurate picture of the teachings from either all, some, or most Calvinists and this depending on the specific topic I am addressing. I have absolutely no desire to play with straw men or misrepresent my godly mentors and comrades. If in fact I have failed in my attempt to be accurate at some point, understanding my audience, I ask your forgiveness, and I am more than happy to correct my unintentional error.

The format followed in the book is to note several affirmations and disaffirmations regarding each of the biblical doctrines. In addition, some of the same Scriptures, illustrations and logical reasons are found under different doctrinal affirmations and disaffirmations. These repetitions are intentional in order to elucidate my position as well as show Scriptural and logical support on the particular topic being addressed without unnecessarily referring the reader to other places in the book. In a few instances, it was more prudent to refer the reader to a more comprehensive explanation in another chapter. Chapters 17 and 18 explain concepts used throughout the book more specifically and thoroughly, and chapters 19 and 20 address Calvinistic interpretations of key Calvinist passages and therefore do not follow the format of affirmations and disaffirmations.

I am going to approach the subject of Calvinism by using terms that are specific enough to avoid misrepresenting my Calvinist brothers and sisters while simultaneously avoiding unnecessarily confusing the reader by hopelessly entangling them in the web of incalculable nuances of Calvinism.

I use the term major Calvinist to include five-point Calvinists regardless of other differences, e.g. order of decrees, baptism, etc., and refer to such simply as Calvinists or Calvinism. The distinctions between hyper-Calvinists and five-point Calvinists are not addressed in this book. I use the term moderate Calvinist or Calvinism to include views that hold to four points of Calvinism, excluding limited atonement. I would further classify some Calvinists by the term minor Calvinist. Minor Calvinists would include a host of people who still identify themselves as Calvinist, but only because they lean more in the direction of Calvinism than Arminianism. They may claim to believe in one to three points of Calvinism, or even four points, but only as defined by them. Minor Calvinists neither subscribe to Dortian Calvinism nor to many of the general definitions, corollaries, and conclusions associated with either moderate Calvinism or Calvinism. Minor Calvinists have so nuanced their view of Calvinism that their position actually becomes a distinctively personal Calvinism. I believe minor Calvinists should discontinue describing themselves as various kinds of Calvinists since that description contributes to the obscuration of the disquieting realities of Calvinism.

The last distinction I would make is what I call a disenchanted Calvinist. Disenchanted Calvinists would include me and all who once wore the label Calvinist, who now have doffed the Calvinist regalia, but yet still respect and love those who are Calvinist. Rather than being angry or resentful of Calvinists, disenchanted Calvinists are grateful for what they have learned from Calvinists and for most Calvinists’ deep love and respect for the Scripture.

That is to say, disenchanted Calvinists are dissatisfied with the logic, exegesis, theology, and conclusions of Calvinism. Consequently, disenchanted Calvinists can no longer be labeled Calvinist without contributing further to the popular confusion about the actual claims and implications of Calvinism. Moreover, most Calvinists would strongly demur if we did identify ourselves as Calvinists. We find the acronym of the TULIP¹ to be an unsatisfactory acronym for representing the salvific truths of the Scripture. I actually believe that many Calvinists, moderate Calvinists and minor Calvinists would become disenchanted Calvinists if time were taken for true reflection on all that Calvinism entails and consistency was sought between the thoughts and words of their prayers, proclamations and teachings from Scripture. My prayer is that this book would contribute to such consistency.

Therefore, I refer to those who are thankful for the influence of all who seek to be Biblicists, be they Calvinist, Arminian, Molinist or other non-Calvinists, as either minor or disenchanted Calvinists. Additionally, moderate, minor or disenchanted Calvinists cannot be rightly classified as Arminian.

Also, it is worth noting an alternative to the TULIP proposed by Dr. Timothy George.² He uses ROSES: R= radical depravity, O= overcoming grace, S= sovereign election, E= eternal life and S=singular redemption. I think that many who find themselves continually modifying the TULIP may be more in agreement with this acronym.

The reason I am spending the time to address concerns with Calvinism and not Arminianism is because in Baptist life, questions regarding issues relating to theology are usually related to whether one agrees or disagrees with Calvinism rather than Arminianism; Baptists, other than Free Will Baptists, are not generally Arminian in their theology. Further, it is simply imprecise for a Calvinist to dismiss people like me by labeling us Arminian.

I do not pretend to even entertain the thought that the following comments will solve the age-old debate or necessarily convert anyone from Calvinism, but rather I only intend to clarify succinctly what I believe concerning areas where I disagree with Calvinism’s interpretations. The reality is that Calvinism proves to be uncompelling for most of the Christian community. Hence, I love and respect my Calvinist friends, but I do not wish to imbibe at the cisterns of Calvinism, for I have come to believe that they are contaminated with faulty theology and logic.

I have endeavored to lay out my beliefs concerning Calvinism in numerous conversations with Arminians and Calvinists, in writings, and in a series that I preached concerning the subject.³ Here I am trying to encapsulate my beliefs under specific headings concerning various points where my views would be somewhat different than that of Calvinists in order to enable those with questions to read about the particular point in which they are interested, for example, The Love of God.

Often it seems that some Calvinists think that the reason those like me do not accept Calvinism as the all-sufficient biblical paradigm of Scripture is simply because we are uninformed about its true teaching or we lack the theological acumen or the necessary acuminous intellect to appreciate the enlightening nuances of Calvinism and the inarguable views leveled against any interpretation which strays from the TULIP.

For me personally, let me say that it may well be true that I lack the theological acumen or the necessary acuminous intellect to rise to the level of my Calvinist brothers and sisters. Moreover, it seems to me that this reality unfortunately is borne out to me repeatedly in the daily intercourse of life by such things as not being able to find my own food dish at times; also, those who walk with me along the corridors of Trinity Baptist Church know that I still have difficulty knowing which is the south and which is the north end of the building. Of course, I have only been here thirteen years, so I could say just give me time; nevertheless, this point I readily concede for me and me alone. However, I would strongly demur to the same characterization of others who agree with me, for that same deficiency cannot be demonstrated to be true about countless others who do not accept Calvinism’s answers to the puzzles of Scripture. See Appendix 1.

Furthermore, it is not true of me that my lack of sympathy for the soteriological⁴ tenets of Calvinism is due to my unfamiliarity with their positions and their responses to my objections. Actually, it is my familiarity with the Scripture and the interpretations of them by Calvinists that precipitated and perpetuated my disenchantment with certain aspects of Calvinism. I was classified as a four-point Calvinist without any clarifications for twenty years; I have and still do respect and study countless Calvinist theologians including Calvin. My disenchantment with the tenets, implications, conclusions, corollaries and Calvinistic interpretations of a host of verses in order to sustain the TULIP of Calvinism has been the result of an arduous, and at times disconcerting, journey over the past thirteen years rather than an epiphanic moment.

My disenchantment grew out of endeavoring to simply study and expound the Scriptures, answer innumerable questions posed to me by those who have graced the halls of Trinity Baptist Church, and to think deeply about the actualities of Calvinism. This endeavor led me down an unchosen path where I was continually confronted with the incompatibility of Calvinism and simple and impartial reading of Scripture. For many years, I remained quite content with the logic of the system, but all the while experiencing an ever-increasing disquietude regarding the usefulness of the system in illumining the Scripture and accurately portraying the picture of God depicted therein. Consequently, regardless of what some may be inclined to say about me, my reasons for not being a Calvinist are that when all things are considered, I no longer find their biblical and logical explanations compelling.

My position will be labeled by some Calvinists as Arminian, and by most Arminians as Calvinism. However, those who choose to do so merely demonstrate that they are held captive by the overly simplistic and fallacious either/or fallacy, and do not recognize the nuances of my beliefs that preclude me from being either.

While it is true that Arminius and the Remonstrants have an understanding closer to Calvinism regarding some issues than that of popular Arminian understandings, my beliefs are closer to most Calvinists with regard to such. Further, none of my statements concerning my soteriological position, or problems with the TULIP, are to be understood or characterized as against Calvinists, but rather against the system of Calvinism. I have great regard, appreciation, and esteem for most Calvinists’ love for God and His Word. Further, I owe no small measure of my spiritual growth and knowledge of Scripture to Calvinists.

Let me state clearly that the difference between a Calvinist, an Arminian, and me is not a disbelief in any of the Scripture—I am speaking of we who accept the inerrancy of Scripture—but rather how we weave the tapestry of Scripture together. I must admit that the problem that I see with staunch Calvinists or Arminians is that their interpretive model is at times uncomfortably close to the hermeneutics of others, whose approach to paradoxical Scriptures is to interpret Scriptures contrary to their own system by steps that result in the malformation of those Scriptures rather than readjusting their own system. This approach does not allow the straightforward teaching of Scripture to reign regardless if it is harmonizable by man’s theological system. An example of this is the work that is done by Calvinists in restricting terms like world, all people, all nations, everyone, etc., in certain verses in order to bolster support for limited atonement. In addition, this in no way implies that I am against theological systems or thinking systematically about theology, for my position is quite the contrary, and that is why my system has changed.

There are examples in history where one side of a truth was pressed too far, such as the mechanical dictation theory, which makes the apostles mere keyboards in inscripturating the Bible, thereby disallowing their humanness to be reflected in the Scripture. Of course, the other end of the spectrum overemphasizes the humanity of the inspiration process, leaving us with an inspirational fallible human book. The same could be said of extreme views of the virgin birth, making it supernatural to the exclusion of anything natural, or a myth to make the human-born Jesus seem more divine. It is the practice of some throughout history with regards to Christ, the theanthropic man, to emphasize either His deity to the exclusion of or marginalization of His humanity or vice versa.

To me, Calvinists, at times, similarly emphasize certain Scriptures that clearly articulate in no uncertain terms God’s part in salvation, but then minimize or obfuscate man’s part, which is articulated with equal lucidity in the Scripture. Such minimization or obfuscation is done by either reading verses apart from the rest of revelation as though they stood alone, or by giving what appears to me to be double-talk or illogical answers as well as being biblically unbalanced.

With regard to isolating verses, no one verse can be read or understood apart from the complete revelation of God. Although all who maintain the inerrancy of Scripture would affirm this, our arguments surely seem to minimize it at times. Acts 2:47 would be an example: The Lord was adding to their number day by day those who were being saved. Should we rightly conclude, from that single verse, that God is the only one who plays a part in the salvation of people and that man plays no part because that verse only speaks of God doing something? Or could we rightly conclude that no one repented or believed the gospel because that single verse doesn’t say anyone did those things? Could we rightly conclude that no one preached the gospel to those the Lord added to the church because that one verse says nothing about anyone preaching? The reality is that no single verse or passage explains everything, whether it is John 6:44, 2 Corinthians 4:3—6, or any other verse. The same is true of Acts 2:47. Clearly, John did not believe that regeneration precedes faith. He wrote at the close of his gospel, "But these have been written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and