This blog briefly addresses man-made doctrines using Calvinism as an example.  Arminianism is the extreme on the other side of that coin.  Many Bible-based, non-denominational churches tend to lean towards Calvinism more so than Arminianism, which tends to show up more in denominational churches like Baptists and Methodists.

Calvinism qualifies as doctrines of men since it elaborates, extends, and makes reasoned, deductive, conclusions based on the Bible that are not explicitly found in the Bible.  Consider the conflicts between the Pharisees and Jesus regarding “doctrines of men” (Mark 7:13), where Jesus criticizes them for basing their judgments on oral tradition rather than the Law (Torah) and the Prophets.  Jesus also warned about the danger of the doctrines of men (Mark 8:14-15).  They can deceive very cleverly and subtly.  These deceptions usually use the tactics of simplistic reasoning or complex rationalizations.  To truly understand all the stated and implied aspects of Calvinism requires the hearer to grasp so many underlying details that the hearer loses track of some of the connecting dots of the argument and ends up accepting the rationalization in spite of not understanding it completely.

In fact, this oral tradition or unwritten law  was codified and became known as the Talmud, culminating into Jewish doctrines and religious law, the halakha.  The Talmud is further broken down into the Mishna (written collection of the oral tradition) and Gemara (a supplement to the Mishna).  Add to this the Jewish exegesis or interpretation of the written and oral law, called the Midrash and you got one heck of a sophisticated system based more on the reasonings of men rather than what is found in the Jewish Scriptures.  Don’t we have that kind of thing today with the “…isms” surrounding Protestant Christianity (Calvinism, Monergism, Arminianism, Synergism, etc.) ?

Back to Calvinism… The focus here is not to argue the tenets of Calvinism centered around the mnemonic, TULIP.  These types of arguments have been going on for hundreds of years with no obvious winner.  The debate never ends.  It just devolves into very complex, intellectual reasonings that end up dividing men instead of uniting them.  Let’s not go down that perpetual rabbit hole.  I would rather we take the blue pill and remain ignorant about the details in Calvinism.

Let’s just see it for what it appears to be: an inadequate attempt by men to extend the knowledge about what the Bible says.  And therein lies the problem: we sometimes try to elaborate on what the Bible may seem to imply, not what it plainly states.  This is how man-made doctrines originate and deviate regarding the Bible.  These extensions of the Bible become the new basis for understanding the Bible.  What’s worse is that now all of the scriptures must be reinterpreted in this new, supposed light of truth.  Throw away inductive reasoning (what the Bible says), only use deductive reasoning (preconceived premises) based on a new foundation of man-made doctrines.

An example of examining Scriptures in a Calvinistic light is Ezekiel:

Ezekiel 18: 4 “Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die.”

Ezekiel 18:20 “The soul that sinneth, it shall die.”

Ezekiel 18:24 “But when the righteous turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and doeth according to all the abominations that the wicked man doeth, shall he live? All his righteousness that he hath done shall not be mentioned: in his trespass that he hath trespassed, and in his sin that he hath sinned, in them shall he die.”

Ezekiel 18:26 “When a righteous man turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and dieth in them; for his iniquity that he hath done shall he die.”

Ezekiel 33:13 “When I shall say to the righteous, that he shall surely live; if he trust to his own righteousness, and commit iniquity, all his righteousnesses shall not be remembered; but for his iniquity that he hath committed, he shall die for it.”

Chapter 18 and 33 of Ezekiel clearly teaches the eternal principle of who is accepted and rejected by God. Those that turn away from God are condemned, and those that turn to or back to God are accepted. To get around this plain understanding, some Calvinist adherents ruin these scriptures by saying the “death” referred to is only physical death (Babylonian attack on Jerusalem), and that the “righteous” mentioned here are self-righteous people not truly righteous ones, although the Lord is clearly contrasting the wicked with the righteous, not the wicked with the self-righteous. It doesn’t make sense to compare the wicked to the self-righteous! Look at how basic principles of hermeneutics are abandoned by Calvinists to maintain their doctrinal positions when God, through the Scriptures, would seek to correct them otherwise.  This is a seduction.  This is bewitchment.  This is being on the losing end in the grave wrestling with wicked spirits in high places of authority.  As it is written:

Ephesians 6:12: For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.

This example gets to the heart of Calvinism: unconditional election.  Not wanting to explain how this doctrine came to be (I leave it up to the Calvinist),  let’s focus instead on some of the inevitable outcomes of embracing this doctrine: encouraging wickedness and losing assurance of salvation.  The rationale follows that those who are elected by God cannot become un-elected since, as one Calvinist put it,  “God Does Not Make Mistakes“. This results in the well-known phrase, once saved, always saved.  It just boggles the mind how they will take this doctrine to such an extreme and say if a person is truly elected, then they could live a totally wicked lifestyle afterwards and still are guaranteed to go to heaven, which is a logical conclusion of unconditional election.  Some famous pastors have actually said these words on Sunday morning sermons! Usually Calvinists respond to this by deflecting and shifting the focus to a different perspective and say if a person goes back into a wicked lifestyle then that proves they were never elected to begin with.  And if you follow that line of argument, then you actually have much less assurance of salvation than those that rely only on only the Bible since you cannot know for sure that you are truly saved until you reach the end of your days on earth and look back and see that you have not wickedly departed from the Lord! The Bible clearly teaches that those that believe (present tense) have eternal life.  Your assurance is already there if you believe and continue to believe.  No need to peer into the future and wonder if you really are going to make it!  I’ll take the Bible way of assurance of salvation over Calvinism anytime.

Here is a short, brief list of reasons to reject Calvinism as man-made doctrines:

  1. It is not biblical.  While it supposedly is based on the bible, it really extends the bible by adding words not in the bible. For instance, while the scriptures mention election as a major biblical doctrine, it never refers to it as unconditional election (the “u” in TULIP).  Along this line of reasoning, while the scriptures mention grace, it never refers to it as irresistible grace (the “i” in TULIP). Let us focus only on what the Bible says.
  2. Warnings of Altering God’s Word – Many scriptures warn us to not twist the meaning of the scriptures. Proverbs 30:6 – “Do not add to his words, lest he rebuke you and you be found a liar.”
  3. Sufficiency of Scripture – The Bible claims to be totally sufficient for all things. 2 Timothy 3:16-17 – “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.” Let’s stick with the Bible.
  4. Sola Scriptura – One of the main themes of the reformation movement was the emphasis on the scriptures again, to focus only on what the scriptures say as the final authority.
  5. The Canon Is Closed. While not a Bible doctrine per se,  most Christian churches hold to this doctrine, that the books of the Bible are closed, no more to be added or taken away.  Hence, we should not rely upon man-made doctrines created long after the Bible was written.  Calvinism only became formalized during the early 1600s.
  6. Statements of Faith – Most churches have statements of faith or what we believe assertions that are based on biblical quotations.  Most of these do not mention any of the Calvinism doctrines.  So to teach Calvinism in a church whose official representation of major Church doctrines does not include Calvinism gives the appearance of being disingenuous, hypocritical, and deceptive.  This is the kind of stuff that will push the Spirit of Truth out of a church!  God help us to not have that dreaded epitaph recorded in Revelation 3:1 fall on us:  “And unto the angel of the church in Sardis write: These things saith He that hath the seven Spirits of God and the seven stars: I know thy works, and that thou hast a name that thou livest, but thou art dead.”

So what are we really debating here?  Isn’t it this:  the Bible vs. the Bible plus Calvinism.  Isn’t the right choice obvious?

In sum I would add another hermeneutics principle that encapsulates all of the above reasons:

Every Major Doctrine Embraced By The Church Should Be Explicitly Stated in the Bible.