HyperCalvinism
QUESTION
“Hyper-Calvinism is a branch of Protestant theology that takes GOD's sovereignty to its logical conclusion, placing strong emphasis on supralapsarianism, or salvation from eternity, where the atonement of Christ was difficult for the non-elect to understand, and where man had little to do with his salvation, where there is nothing he can do to resist being saved, wherein evangelism was placed bat lower-than-normal emphasis as compared to Calvinism, and where assurance of salvation was felt within a person, identified by introspection.” (Wikipedia)
Would you accept the title of “Hyper Calvinist”? Some of my in-laws were accused of being such while we still attended a sovereign Grace church. They were sound on the doctrine of salvation, as far as I could tell, although they differed from Primitive Baptists on other topics and held to some absolute predestination.
What terminology do you believe best describes Primitives Baptists? Please explain why you would or would not consider Primitive Baptists “Hyper-Calvinists.”
INTRODUCTORY ANSWER
There’s a lot to address on the subject of Hyper-Calvinism. I feel certain that this subject will raise a number of additional questions for discussion. For the sake of brevity, I will start with a few observations regarding “Hyper-Calvinism” that are broadly true in my experience:
Hyper-Calvinism is difficult to define. Years ago I wrote a short video and article on the problems that arise from the fact that there is no universally agreed-upon definition of “Calvinism.” The prefix “hyper” intends “above or beyond.” It follows that “Hyper-Calvinism” is likewise plagued with all the definitional uncertainty that attends “Calvinism.” This observation should cause everyone to take a long pause before entering into any discussion of the matter or prior to making any decision to either adopt or reject the label.
Hyper-Calvinism is a scarlet letter. Irrespective of how it is defined by an individual employing the term, it is almost universally used in a pejorative sense that intends “those who believe something wrong.” In my experience, this label is applied for the purpose of ending any further theological inquiry into the doctrinal matter under consideration. Hyper-Calvinists are theological lepers and their ideas must be consigned to outer darkness where they warrant no further consideration.
Accusations of Hyper-Calvinism arise from zealous passion rather than biblical consistency. There are many examples, but the most evident one is found among modern Calvinists who insist upon the doctrine of election and limited atonement (both of which are true) while simultaneously insisting that the declaration of Christ’s finished, particular work extends a sincere or well-meant offer of salvation (WMO) to those for whom Jesus Christ did not die. The WMO is is a doctrine so evidently at variance with particular redemption that it seems silly to have to point it out. I have referred to Well-Meant-Offerism as the Kobashi Maru (unwinnable scenario) of modern Calvinism, because it is evidently illogical, since there is no atoning basis for the offer to the non-elect and the atonement of Christ is the only basis for salvation.
There is much more to say on the matter but I wanted to start with those observations to provide some measure of orientation to the discussion.
ANSWERS TO THE QUESTIONS RAISED
Would you accept the title of “Hyper Calvinist?
Before accepting that moniker, I would want to be clear on the definition of “Hyper-Calvinism” that is under consideration. This tendency on my part has been met with some measure of ire over the years, but I’ll take this occasion to reiterate that many vain and unprofitable theological discussions proceed on the short-sighted assumption that “Everybody knows what <insert term here> means.” That is so frequently NOT the case that I believe it is necessary to explicitly define what one has in mind prior to any engagement on the topic. Many define “Hyper-Calvinism” as “people who don’t believe in preaching the gospel.” By that definition, I would not say that Primitive Baptists are “Hyper-Calvinists". In fact, given the great prevalence of false-gospels in Christendom today, I would counter the accusation that “PBs don’t believe in preaching the gospel” by saying, “PBs may be among the few who are preaching the gospel at all.” Stated plainly, most of what is taught as “the gospel” in Christendom today is “another gospel.” (Galatians 1:6). A false gospel is not made true simply by the breadth of its distribution or by its popular acceptance among professing evangelicals. The true gospel of the grace of Christ is determined by the accuracy of its content. Simply put, the gospel declares the finished work of Christ on behalf of the sheep. That is precisely what we Primitive Baptists preach. The gospel does not extend a potential offer of salvation to all of humanity based on the unfinished work of a “Jesus” that’s looking for you to complete a work that he has left undone.
All that said, I have found it helpful to use Phil Johnson’s Primer on Hyper-Calvinism to define the term for discussion. Whether or not one agrees with his fivefold approach to defining the term, it nevertheless provides a framework sufficient to support the weight of the theological discussion. For the uninitiated, Phil Johnson is a Lordship Salvation, Calvinist who has worked alongside John MacArthur for decades. As such he is adamantly opposed to all five expressions of Hyper-Calvinism as defined in his primer:
For the sake of brevity, I’ll simply state that by Johnson’s definition, I am a 5 point Hyper-Calvinist. Perhaps we can discuss each of these 5 items and the biblical reasons why I hold that position in subsequent discussions.
Some of my in-laws were accused of being such while we still attended a sovereign Grace church. They were sound on the doctrine of salvation, as far as I could tell, although they differed from Primitive Baptists on other topics and held to some absolute predestination.
I don’t doubt that they endured that accusation. The term gets bandied about as a synonym for “heretic” by most evangelicals. Whether or not the accusation is warranted depends entirely on how it was defined by the one using it. I should point out that it is by no means certain that someone using the term has any idea what it means or even what they intend by it, other than to be insulting. People are more likely to parrot what they’ve heard others than to understand what they’ve heard others say.
What terminology do you believe best describes Primitives Baptists?
In brief, I believe we strive to be covenantal in doctrine, primitive in practice, baptistic in ordinance, and biblical in creed. Each of those points require considerable qualification and there’s a great deal of potential to misunderstand that statement when such brevity is employed. But I’ll leave it at that for now.
Please explain why you would or would not consider Primitive Baptists “Hyper-Calvinists.”
Generally speaking, Primitive Baptists are Hyper-Calvinists per the fivefold test in Johnson’s Primer. There is some variance among PB Elders on the matter of “God’s love for the non-elect” and so-called “common grace.”
- Elder Daniel Samons