What remains so stunning to me as I read the thread on the Founders’ Blog regarding Johnny Hunt’s SBC Presidential Candidacy and the Calvinist Gadfly’s thread induction of Johnny Hunt into the Arminian Hall of Fame (along with every other example of of the “debate”) is the similarity of methodology by both parties in the Calvinism “debate” .
However, as much as both agree regarding tactics they are equally blind to the similarities.
Calvinist: “Remember Calvinism is just a nickname for the true gospel.”
Non-Calvinist: “Five Point Calvinism is a VIRUS.”
Calvinist: You don’t care about legitimate conversions, only numbers.
Non-Calvinist: You don’t care about evangelism, period.
Faulty Icon(s) (the names are taken from the thread but others could be substituted)
Calvinist: Johnny Hunt is anti-calvinist. Watch out. Look to a godly man like John Piper, can’t imagine any one having a problem with him.
Non-Calvinist: John Piper is a hyper Calvinist. Watch out. Look to a Godly man like Johnny Hunt, can’t imagine anyone having a problem with him.
Calvinist: Dang it, we are not fatalistic, deterministic, or unevangelistic. However, if you aren’t a Calvinist you are an Arminian.
Non-Calvinist: Dang it, we are not Arminians. However, Calvinists are fatalistic, deterministic, and unevangelistic.
Cheap Potshots in Public Places
Calvinist: I’m going to put Johnny Hunt in the Arminian Hall of Fame
Non-Calvinist: Well, I just hope no one gets saved thatâ€™s not supposed to.
And you know what? Both sides justify their methods with
(A) They did it first.
(B) They did it worse.
All the while they are pulling from the same bag of tricks and launching the same weapons from opposite corners of the ring at fellow believers.
It isn’t a solution but a lot of this could change if we saw the issue from this perspective. Add to it that the debate over Calvinism isn’t simple, easily reducible, or without room for disagreement between truly Orthodox (and well thought out, for that matter) positions.