Where'd All These Calvinists Come From? Part 5 of 10
In case you hadn't noticed, I've been attempting to reconstruct the history of the resurgence of Calvinism among younger evangelicals in the late 20th century, and I've been attempting to do this even in the order of these posts. So I'm not suggesting that the first (or the tenth) reason I'll give is the most important. Rather, I'm suggesting that in the 1940's there was little encouragement, though there were Spurgeon re-prints. Then there was added the increasingly known preaching of Lloyd-Jones. To that, by the late 1950's, you could add the re-prints of Banner of Truth. Then, in the 1960's & 1970's, I have suggested that the rise of Evangelism Explosion was quietly undermining one of the main objections American evangelicals had to a Calvinistic soteriology.
As we move into the 1970's and 1980's I would suggest that another main cause for the renewed popularity of Calvinism came through the Inerrancy Controversy. Controversy over the authority of Scripture has always been there. From the early church to the Reformation, various challenges to Scripture's authority were met and defenses erected. From the rising deism inside "Christian" countries in the 17th and 18th centuries, to the early work of Biblical critics in the 18th and 19th centuries, Bible-believing Christians have had to articulate their understanding of God's infallible working through sinful humans to compose His perfect Scriptures. From Gaussen in Geneva to Warfield in Princeton, the 19th-century churches produced careful defenses of the inerrancy of the Bible.
Controversy over the Bible has always been with us. But it is the storm summarized and energized by Harold Lindsell's 1976 Battle for the Bible that I specifically have in mind. (See the 9Marks website under articles for an annotated bibliography on this issue.) The Lutheran Church (Missouri Synod) was already in the depths of the storm by this time. The Southern Baptist Convention was just entering it. And evangelicalism at large became galvinized by the International Council on Biblical Inerrancy. Many of the most stalwart defenders of inerrancy were not Calvinists. But many were. Through this controversy, Jim Boice, RC Sproul, Jim Packer, Carl F. H. Henry, Roger Nicole and many other Calvinistic theologians were given larger audiences, especially among ministers. Old Princeton (especially the Hodges, Warfield & Machen) was re-introduced to a new generation.
But there was more to it all than young ministers beginning to read a Hodge here and there, or Carl Henry's vast project (God, Revelation and Authority in 6 volumes!). Theology was being discussed. Young evangelicals were encouraged not simply to preach and pray, visit and counsel, but to engage in theological thinking, to argue systematics. And not only that, but the very shape of the arguments used to promote inerrancy were exemplary of the Reformed understanding of God's complete and ultimate sovereignty over the completely responsible action of human agents. Much more could be said, but you get the idea. In the 1970's and 1980's, many young ministers were being educated theologically by theologians who had Calvinistic soteriology and a Reformed understanding of God and of His work with humanity. Part of what has led to Calvinism among the young has been the defense of Biblical inerrancy--in having a theological conversation at all, but especially by who was defending it, and how.
I am grateful to the Presbyterian Church in American and their ministry to college campuses, Reformed University Fellowship. The Lord used the ministry of my campus minister Ricky Jones to teach me the truty and glory of reformed theology. He was exceedingly patient with me as I struggled to humbly accept what Scripture teaches about reality. May the Lord continue to bless this effective ministry on college campuses.
Posted by: Josh Manley | Jul 19, 2007 8:41:40 AM
I think you are exactly right Dr. Dever. I was just sharing with another pastor yesterday that I think the SBC "Conservative Resurgence" has played a major role in the coming reformation in the SBC. I am a young pastor who never struggled with the inerrancy of Scripture because that was already dealt with before I was saved (1998). So for me the question wasn't authority; it was, "what does the Word of God say?" And with this came the realization of reformed theology. I praise God for everything that has taken place and that will take place for His glory and the benefit of the bride of Christ.
Posted by: Randy Alston | Jul 19, 2007 10:13:25 AM
In my case it was not through books or debates or specific theological teaching... For I avoided all that for a time. But it was by word of mouth, and the fact that Calvinistic Churches feed an nourish the soul with the meat of the Word of God. So would I like to sip milk once a week or really be fed the Word? The choice was clear, yet coming to accept the teachings of Calvinism took time, yet was the only way I could truly understand how men could be saved in Old testament times.
Posted by: Bryon | Jul 19, 2007 3:19:48 PM
Dr. Dever,
While I cannot speak for the movement of "young calvinists", I can speak from my personal experience as one (I am 34, so I guess that puts me on the older edge of the movement). My first exposure to Calvinists were the 'Old Princeton' men (I of course knew about Spurgeon, Whitefield, and even Packer--but had no idea they were Calvinists). I began to read the Old Princeton fellows (particularly Warfield and Hodge--and later Machen) as part of my self-study in inerrancy during my late college years. I was not satisfied with the simplistic answers I received in my Christian college courses, and deeply struggled with the issue of inerrancy. The writings of these men were a great aid in my understanding of the subject and calmed my intellectual fears. While at the time I did not study their Calvinistic system (that would happen later in Seminary), it changed my perception of Calvinist forever. I now saw them as people who truly loved Scripture and valued the glory of God above all else. From there, I would have to say your post on the influence of Banner of Truth was certainly true of me. I saw a copy of Baxter's Reformed Pastor and for some reason it peaked my interest (not that Baxter was a very consistent Calvinist). From there I began to soak up every Puritan I could get my hands on--and still do to this day. It took 10 years of study and prayer, but I can now proudly say I am a "Young Calvinist".
Posted by: Josh Gelatt | Jul 19, 2007 3:22:52 PM
I have been wondering the same thing recently about the resurgence of Calvinism. I will read the rest of the posts with interest.
I too came from an Arminian background of sorts, and through reading Spurgeon, Sproul, and others, because a Calvinist.
However, about ten years ago, I started to see some inconsistiencies in Calvinism when compared to Scripture. However, I knew that Arminianism was not correct Biblically. So I began searching the Scriptures and comparing them with the doctrines of Calvinism.
Over the past ten years, based on careful Bible study, I have come to reject all five points of Calvinism as they are defined by most Calvinists. However, I am not an Arminian either.
I think that most young Calvinists rightly see the exegetical problems with Arminianism, and think that Calvinism is the only other option. Furthermore, since much of Christianity today is illogical and shallow, Calvinism does have a logical and informational appeal.
But few people understand that there is a third option, which is also exegetically based, and which is also heavy on Bible exposition.
We believe that justification is by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone, completely apart from works. Works, which are necessary for sanctification and future reward, do not prove or disprove that a person is regenerate.
Christ has died for all, but only those who believe in Him receive everlasting life, which, by definition, cannot be lost. Faith, since it is not a work of any kind, is non-meritorious.
Election is God's choice of people, not for justification, but for fulfilling certain tasks and responsibilities both in this life and in the life to come.
There are numerous websites, churches, and books out there that teach and present this views, but I doubt these blog comments are supposed to be used for "commercials" about other views, so I will refrain.
I just wanted to say that I agree with you about why there are so many Calvinists today, for the road you have described so far was my road as well. But that was when I only thought there were two options. Now that I have become aware of a third, I find that it fits much better with Scriptural passages that both Calvinists and Arminians have long fought over.
Posted by: Jeremy Myers | Jul 22, 2007 3:21:35 PM
"We believe that justification is by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone, completely apart from works. Works, which are necessary for sanctification and future reward, do not prove or disprove that a person is regenerate."
Sounds to me like you've bought into the Wilkin/Hodges "Free Grace" position -- correct?
SDG,
dbh
Posted by: David B. Hewitt | Jul 22, 2007 9:35:13 PM
The article is spot on, IMO.
I would suggest that settling the 'Inerrancy Controversy' may have had some unintended effects. On its own merits the verdict of the controversy offered a form of permission, namely that we should seek to settle doctrinal questions on the basis of Scripture, sometimes over against the popular denominational positions I was exposed to. This surely included election. The point is that I (and many I know in my own late 30's age range) looked to the text itself, rather than merely whoever we supposed the doctrinal leaders were at the time, to answer these sorts of questions.
It wasn't a defiant revolution (or maybe it was), but inerrancy demanded that the Bible itself form the basis of our beliefs. Inerrancy also demanded that we treat all of Scripture seriously, even the parts that tend to trouble us most.
Looking back, I don't think this should surprise anyone. Once the SBC reasserted the inerrancy of the Bible, it seems an obvious corollary that we would look there.
Posted by: SGaylord | Jul 24, 2007 3:13:25 AM
I know this is a no brainer,but has anyone thought that the reason for the resurgance of Calvinism is because God has decreed it?
Posted by: J W MMajors | Aug 23, 2007 6:04:31 AM