A Method to Evaluate Honesty in Calvinist Dialogue

In the realm of theological discussions, particularly regarding Calvinism, it can often feel like engaging in a debate with individuals who are unwavering in their beliefs. This blog post aims to provide a method for determining the honesty of Calvinists during dialogue, based on personal experiences and observations.

Understanding the Challenge

Many individuals, including the author, have encountered Calvinists who seem to defend their beliefs regardless of the evidence presented. This phenomenon can be frustrating, especially when it appears that no matter the argument, the response will always be a disagreement. The author notes that some Calvinists are quick to dismiss opposing views, often resorting to insults or claims of misunderstanding.

The Method Explained

To effectively evaluate the honesty of a Calvinist in dialogue, the author suggests a two-step method involving quotes from respected Calvinist theologians. Here’s how it works:

Step 1: Present a Quote

1. Choose a Respected Calvinist Figure: Select a prominent voice in Calvinism, such as John MacArthur, John Piper, or R.C. Sproul.
2. Find a Quote: Locate a succinct quote that explains a core doctrine of Calvinism, such as one of the TULIP doctrines (Total depravity, Unconditional election, Limited atonement, Irresistible grace, and Perseverance of the saints).
3. Provide Biblical Counterarguments: Present one or two Bible verses that contradict the doctrine as explained in the quote.
4. Engage in Dialogue: Ask the Calvinist for their thoughts on the quote and the biblical verses provided.

Expected Response

Typically, the Calvinist will:

• Defend the theologian (e.g., John MacArthur) rather than addressing the biblical verses.
• Often resort to derogatory remarks, implying that the questioner lacks understanding of the Bible.
• Suggest that questioning a respected theologian is inappropriate.

Step 2: Present the Same Quote Without Attribution

1. Rephrase the Quote: Take the same quote but present it without mentioning the theologian’s name. Instead, frame it as a statement of Calvinism.
2. Provide Biblical Counterarguments Again: As before, include biblical verses that challenge the statement.
3. Engage Again: Ask the Calvinist for their thoughts on this statement.

Expected Response

In this scenario, the Calvinist is likely to:

• Deny that the statement reflects Calvinist beliefs.
• Accuse the questioner of misrepresenting Calvinism.
• Claim that the questioner does not understand the theology.

Analyzing the Responses

Through this method, one can gauge the honesty of the Calvinist in question. If they defend the theologian when the quote is attributed but deny the same quote when it is presented without attribution, it indicates a lack of intellectual honesty. This inconsistency reveals that they may prioritize defending their theological framework over engaging with biblical truth.

Conclusion

This method serves as a tool for anyone looking to engage in meaningful dialogue with Calvinists. While it requires some preparation, the insights gained can be invaluable in understanding the dynamics of such discussions. By testing this approach, individuals can discern whether they are conversing with someone genuinely interested in theological truth or someone who is merely defending a position at all costs.

Thank you for reading, and may your discussions be fruitful and enlightening.