Politics: One More Reason to Hate Calvinism
Calvinists are sooooo much more spiritual than we are that we can’t even talk about real life without being corrected. So, let me instruct you on how to discuss last night’s election without being chastised by a Calvinist:
‘Like, praise Jesus. But like, I was watching the election last night, not caring about who won because Jesus should be the king anyway. I just wanted to see how like, you know, the gospel narrative was going to unfold. It was just so awesome to see what Jesus already planned to do. Praise Jesus. I am still contemplating what the election results mean in their gospel context. Like, it’s really, really deep. In my own part of the gospel narrative, I read from the Scriptures about Jesus (of course) for several hours and then went to the polls to see what gave me joy. When I voted, it was like, a mere natural flow dude.”
Seriously, you can’t say anything. I tweeted something about political conservatism, and the next thing I know, I’m getting blasted for “hoping in conservatism instead of Jesus.” I saw where other tweets that referred to needed political change in this country were met with,” Only Jesus can bring about change.” Right. How dare we be so unspiritual! Folks, these people are making me gag. And I think the primary source of my gagetry is the hypocrisy on steroids. In regard to politics, Calvinists in this country posit a mindset of being above the fray, or endeared to loftier concerns unlike the everyday spiritual peasants among us.
The truth of the matter is that Calvin and his followers throughout the centuries have been rabid, political animals. The Puritans were up to their ears in political intrigue, and the executions of many Reformers/Puritans were for political reasons and not martyrdom for the faith (though factiously represented as such). In fact, the Puritans who came to America were political refugees and little more than that.
While pretending to be above the concerns of mere worldly governments, American Calvinists walk about quoting the Westminster Confession constantly. Do you know what that is? It was a document prepared by Reformed “Divines” at the behest of the English Parliament! It was a religious rule of law for the church and state. The European marriage of church and state resulted in the innumerable slaughter of thousands in Christ’s name.
But American Calvinists are above getting involved in the political system that put an end to all of that. It’s like, so unJesus.
I mean really, how petty can a system be when it lacks so much blood and torture?
paul
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
Reblogged this on Clearcreek Chapel Watch.
LikeLike
one of the christian bloggers i follow passed on a ‘gem’ from a calvinist teacher about the election. he said that either way, God is in charge and Obama’s victory ‘must’ have been God’s will, therefore trust God and accept that God wants Obama to be the president.
mindless theistic determinism much like the religious fatalism of Islam’s ‘moon god’ Allah.
Muslim ‘moon god’
Calvinist ‘moonbats’
’nuff said. -mike
LikeLike
Mike,
And if they can get them to accept that–it of course translates to accepting anything that the elders hand down locally. There is no doubt that they will use the election to play the submission card.
LikeLike
agreed. sounds more and more like the RCC all the time.
-mike
LikeLike
I, of course, do not believe the church and state should be wedded, but before you get too blasphemous, you might want to consider verses like Daniel 4:17, “The sentence is by the decree of the watchers, the decision by the word of the holy ones, to the end that the living may know that the Most High rules the kingdom of men and gives it to whom he will and sets over it the lowliest of men.” It is important to distinguish between God’s revealed will, the Scriptures, and the decreed will of God. There is no question that Obama takes positions that are contrary to the revealed will of God and, therefore, his re-election must be contrary to the revealed will of God. People who wish to be obedient to God, could not have voted for him. Still, the God who works all things according to the counsel of his will is the one who has restored him to the office, all for the good of believers and for his own glory.
It is quite true that many of the Reformers failed to divorce themselves from the RC idea that the church and the state are one, but there are those who would call themselves “Calvinists” in the soteriological sense, who understand that the church and the state are not coextensive.
LikeLike
Randy,
God also decrees judgement. Who he puts in office can be a judgement. I wonder if the economy taking a dive will eliminate some of these mega-churches that either one of us could do without.
LikeLike
Don’t get me started on the political Puritans. They had people costantly going back and forth from England for this or that depending on who was in power and their connections. , The different factions were literally ships passing in the night over the Atlantic.
Or the “Political Calvin” or “Political Martin Luther”.
Just remember. A Calvinist does not really vote as in make an informed choice. God decreed their vote from eternity past. That is why it is a waste of time to listen to them.
Because they believe such nonesense, They should be deemed incapable of making decisions or making sense. They remain totally depraved and are unable.
LikeLike
“While pretending to be above the concerns of mere worldly governments, American Calvinists walk about quoting the Westminster Confession constantly. Do you know what that is? It was a document prepared by Reformed “Divines” at the behest of the English Parliament! ”
Bingo. If folks would actually be educated at seminary they would know most of the creeds were politically motivated. As were many translations. Sheesh!!!
LikeLike
Paul,
Not only do I agree that God decrees judgment, but I also believe the results of the latest election are one more evidence that he has given our nation up to a debased mind. I believe your question about the economy and mega-churches is a good one. Though I suppose it would be difficult to prove from Scripture that there is anything wrong with churches becoming large, tough economic times certainly do tend to separate the wheat from the weeds.
Lydia,
Thank you for distinguishing “political Calvin” [by extension I assume “political Calvinists”] from theological Calvin, and by extension Calvinists. Though it is quite true Calvin’s political views grew out of his theology, all of his theology is not so integrally related that one must embrace it all if he embraces any of it. As much as I know you hate the idea that Calvin and Luther were the products of their times, I cannot escape that conclusion. Like you, I completely reject their conclusions about the sacral relationship between the church and the state, but I believe it occurred for two reasons: 1. They simply accepted the erroneous views of the RC system out of which they never completely emerged, and 2. They failed to recognize the discontinuity between the Old Covenant and the New Covenant. It was not that they were blood thirsty or necessarily power hungry; they were simply trying to enforce a set of rules that were never intended for the church.
LikeLike
Paul,
Not only do I agree that God decrees judgment, but I believe this latest election is one more evidence that in judgment, he is giving up our nation to a debased mind. Apart from a wide spread national repentance, I believe we are doomed as a nation.
Though I don’t know if it is possible to prove from Scripture that there is anything inherently wrong with a church becoming large, I suspect you are right that tough economic times would tend to distinguish the fools gold from the genuine article.
Lydia,
Thank you for distinguishing “political Calvin” [and by extension Calvinists] from theological Calvin and by extension theological Calvinists. Though Calvin’s political views certainly grew out of his theological views, all of his theology was not so integrally related that one must accept all of what he beleived if he accepts any of it. I certainly agree with you that we must reject Calvin’s idea of a sacral society in which the church and the state are one. Though I know you hate the idea that Calvin and Luther were the products of their times, I cannot escape that conclusion. I think there were certain beliefs and practices they simply brought out of the RC system and never took the time to examine. It was not so much that they were blood thirsty or necessarily power hungry; they simply failed to understand the discontinuity between the Old Covenant and the New Covenant. The theocracy of Israel was clearly a sacral society. If you impose that model on any modern society, you cannot fail to produce something like Calvin’s Geneva.
LikeLike
Lydia,
I am not sure in what sense you are using the term “Calvinist” in regard to making informed choices. I would certainly consider myself a Calvinist in the soteriological sense, but I believe I am as well informed as anyone about the issues facing our nation. I also believe the informed choice I made was decreed by God. It is not necessary to surrender one of those concepts in order to embrace the other.
LikeLike
“Thank you for distinguishing “political Calvin” [by extension I assume “political Calvinists”] from theological Calvin, and by extension Calvinists. Though it is quite true Calvin’s political views grew out of his theology, all of his theology is not so integrally related that one must embrace it all if he embraces any of it. As much as I know you hate the idea that Calvin and Luther were the products of their times, I cannot escape that conclusion. Like you, I completely reject their conclusions about the sacral relationship between the church and the state, but I believe it occurred for two reasons: 1. They simply accepted the erroneous views of the RC system out of which they never completely emerged, and 2. They failed to recognize the discontinuity between the Old Covenant and the New Covenant. It was not that they were blood thirsty or necessarily power hungry; they were simply trying to enforce a set of rules that were never intended for the church.”
Randy, the problem is there is NO difference between the political Calvin and the theological Calvin in the Calvinist thinking paradigm. It was decreed before the foundation of the world that he would be the political/theological Calvin and that he would burn Servetus in the Name of Jesus.. And his doctrines were a convoluted systematic wedding of the two philosophy’s.
The reason your “product of the time” argument does not work is that we have others who did not buy into the state church paradigm and were drowned, bannished and punished for it. So we KNOW for a fact there were those living at the time who were NOT products of their time. .
LikeLike