1 Point Calvinists...?

You may have heard the phrase "Five Points of Calvinism". These five points make up an acrostic known as T.U.L.I.P. Standing for: Total Depravity, Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace, and Perseverance of the Saints. The phrase "Five Points of Calvinism" is a bit misleading (and I agree with R.C. Sproul when he says some of the terms themselves could be worded better, but would destroy the TULIP acrostic). The fact is, John Calvin did not write down his system of theology in five points. What is commonly known as the Five Points of Calvinism was in reality the response of the Synod of Dort to the theological protests brought forth in the year 1618 by the followers of theologian Jacobus Arminius.

The Arminian party presented their arguments against the established Calvinistic teachings of the Dutch Reformed Church in five points, therefore the Synod of Dort replied to the Arminian Remonstrance in five points. The Synod's reply stood in direct contradistinction of what the Arminians proposed. After much debate and study, the Synod of Dort condemned the Arminian teachings as heresy. John Calvin himself had absolutely nothing to do with the formulation of the 5 point response to the Arminians, or the Synod of Dort, because he had been dead over 50 years prior to the whole affair!

The reason I am writing this is because I think there is a bit of confusion on the part of a few Baptist preachers about whether or not they are actually Calvinists or Arminians. Example: A friend of mine has a pastor who claims to be a "moderate Calvinist". However, during a recent Bible study, the pastor revealed that he only believes in two of the five points of Calvinism! He proudly proclaimed that he has no problem with Total Depravity or Perseverance of the Saints, but the other 3 points of Calvinism were damnable heresy! Upon learning what this preacher teaches about the doctrine of Total Depravity, I would say he does not hold Calvinistic view of it either, therefore he is actually- at best- a "1 point Calvinist". He even goes as far as to label regular 5 point Calvinists as "Hyper-Calvinists".


No doubt both my Calvinist and Arminian friends will read this article. While I consider myself a solid 5 Point Calvinist, I do have brothers and sisters on both sides of this issue whom I love and respect. The scope of this is not to debate which theological system is correct. This article isn't even to determine if using these labels is in the best interest of Christian unity. I'll let someone else deal with those issues for now. Here's the problem for me...

I believe the root of the issue for some of these "1 point Calvinists" is this: They want to side with the Arminian party when it comes to Election, the Atonement, Free Will, and Effectual Calling (a better term for Irresistible Grace), but when it comes to the Doctrine of the Perseverance of the Saints, they want to side with the Calvinists. As the old saying goes "they want to have their cake and eat it too". Theologically speaking they side with the Arminians on most of the points, but for some reason they just will not let go of the doctrine of the Perseverance of the Saints. All the while they do not realize that by denying the other 4 "points of Calvinism", they end up committing theological suicide. The 4 points they toss out are linked to (and I believe are in fact) the theological foundation for the doctrine of the Perseverance of the Saints. In other words, by throwing out the points they do not like, they make Perseverance of the Saints sound absurd.


What I'm trying to say is that "1 Point Calvinists" are actually "4 Point Arminians". They may not like to admit this, but if you examine the doctrinal convictions of these preachers and compare them to the positions of both Calvinism and Arminianism, what you conclude is that they are more Arminian than Calvinist. Furthermore, for these preachers to stand behind pulpits and claim to be "Moderate Calvinists", sounds ridiculous to people who actually know what Calvinism teaches. It sounds even worse when they stand up in front of the church claiming to have been to Seminary and studied these things, thus implying they are an authority on such topics!


Let me ask you this: If you are a farmer and you plant 900 acres of cotton and you also plant 100 acres of corn, would you then go around trying to deny being a cotton farmer? Would you claim to be primarily a corn farmer? No. Of course not! It would be silly to do such! You may - at best -be a cotton farmer that dabbles in growing a little bit of corn, but you are by no means primarily a corn farmer. Now taking this analogy to the topic at hand: Can you affirm all but 1 point of Arminianism and still properly claim the title of Calvinist? Again I say No! If you apply our previous conclusion to this situation, you will also have to conclude that what we have here is not a Calvinist at all, but an Arminian that likes to dabble in a little bit of Calvinism!


My conclusion is this: If we choose to use label of Calvinist, Arminian, or Hyper-Calvinist at all, we need to be sure we understand what the label stands for and how to properly apply it to ourselves or others. Above all, do your homework so you don't look foolish to those who know the difference! The "1 Point Calvinist" who I am referring to in this article is making a fool out of himself in front of those in his congregation who know the differences between Calvinists and Arminians. Let us not make same mistake...