# Jeremy Walker on The New Calvinism- FINAL UPDATE



## rbcbob (Dec 20, 2011)

UK pastor Jeremy Walker has posted the first installment of his evaluation of THE NEW CALVINISM on his website here The New Calvinism considered #1 Caveats and characteristics « The Wanderer

PART TWO available here: The New Calvinism considered #2 Commendations « The Wanderer

PART THREE The New Calvinism considered #3 Cautions and concerns « The Wanderer

PART FOUR The New Calvinism considered #4 Conclusions and counsels « The Wanderer


----------



## Zach (Dec 20, 2011)

Thanks for sharing an interesting read, Bob.


----------



## Rufus (Dec 20, 2011)

Thanks for sharing. I've found that the main problem with the "Young, Restless, and Reformed" crowd is that their not actually Reformed (as in they hold to "Calvinism" but don't understand/don't hold to covenant theology/a Reformed confession/a proper view of the Lords day or are fine with images of Christ). However I'm hopeful that through some means this will change and many of these "Calvinistic" baptists will become Reformed Baptists or Presbyterian/Dutch Reformed/etc.

And by the way I was in many ways a "new calvinist" when I joined the Puritanboard, without this website I may have never learned the value of the sabbath, the importance of holding a confession, the regulative principle, why images of Christ are bad, and Presbyterianism.


----------



## rbcbob (Dec 20, 2011)

Rufus said:


> And by the way I was in many ways a "new calvinist" when I joined the Puritanboard, without this website I may have never learned the value of the sabbath, the importance of holding a confession, the regulative principle, why images of Christ are bad, and Presbyterianism.



That is a very encouraging testimony brother!


----------



## Zach (Dec 20, 2011)

I'm with you, Sean. When I joined the Puritan Board I was very much a, "Young, Restless, Reformed" Christian who had had limited contact with the true Reformed faith. Really, my exposure was through one reading of the Westminster Confession of Faith which in hindsight I didn't understand very well. The reality, and I think it is easy for those of us consistently exposed to good teaching in faithful Reformed Denominations as well as online through sites like the Puritan Board or good blogs, is that most people who are Young, Restless, Reformed Christians have never been exposed to the good teaching that we are blessed with hearing every Lord's Day and in reading daily the posts here on the PB. My experience having been one of the Young, Restless, Reformed crowd is that prior to being YRR most came from broad evangelical backgrounds (I did) where there is a hazy perspective of the gospel at best. Thus, when the Doctrines of Grace are presented (and the Lord gives grace) it is the first time many have heard the beauty of the true gospel. I think similar things will happen when they are exposed to Covenant Theology and the framework provided in the Confessions of Faith and Catechisms because it happened to me. Sure, I don't think its realistic to assume that every YRR Christian will one day become Confessional Christian, but I think many are simply never even exposed to them. As "Old Calvinists" I think we must be gracious to the YRR crowd, be glad the gospel of sovereign grace is being shared, but also share the full extent of what it means to be Reformed.


----------



## Rufus (Dec 20, 2011)

Zach said:


> I'm with you, Sean. When I joined the Puritan Board I was very much a, "Young, Restless, Reformed" Christian who had had limited contact with the true Reformed faith. Really, my exposure was through one reading of the Westminster Confession of Faith which in hindsight I didn't understand very well. The reality, and I think it is easy for those of us consistently exposed to good teaching in faithful Reformed Denominations as well as online through sites like the Puritan Board or good blogs, is that most people who are Young, Restless, Reformed Christians have never been exposed to the good teaching that we are blessed with hearing every Lord's Day and in reading daily the posts here on the PB. My experience having been one of the Young, Restless, Reformed crowd is that prior to being YRR most came from broad evangelical backgrounds (I did) where there is a hazy perspective of the gospel at best. Thus, when the Doctrines of Grace are presented (and the Lord gives grace) it is the first time many have heard the beauty of the true gospel. I think similar things will happen when they are exposed to Covenant Theology and the framework provided in the Confessions of Faith and Catechisms because it happened to me. Sure, I don't think its realistic to assume that every YRR Christian will one day become Confessional Christian, but I think many are simply never even exposed to them. As "Old Calvinists" I think we must be gracious to the YRR crowd, be glad the gospel of sovereign grace is being shared, but also share the full extent of what it means to be Reformed.



I also came in from a broad evangelical perspective but was only recently a Christian (and perhaps not a true covert) before I discovered the doctrines of grace. I was dying for fellowship and arrived on the Puritanboard.


----------



## JM (Dec 20, 2011)

Good article. 

But it has me wondering what label I should use if, instead of "John Piper, Mark Dever, C. J. Mahaney, Al Mohler, Mark Driscoll, Matt Chandler, Francis Chan, Kevin DeYoung, Ligon Duncan, Tim Keller, Don Carson, Josh Harris, Wayne Grudem" I reference names like John Gill, John Brine, William Gadsby, Job Hupton, John Rusk, William Huntington, James Popham, J.C. Philpot, John Grace, Isaac Backus, William Rushton, Abraham Booth, William Styles, Washington Wilks, etc? I'm not "Reformed1" or New Calvinist...at least I don't think so.

jm
_________________________________________________
1Leaving the term Reformed for my paedo brethren.


----------



## Unoriginalname (Dec 20, 2011)

That was a good article. I dug it. I think he was fair but pointed out a good number of issues in the movement, circle, sociological group; whatever it is.


----------



## Jared (Dec 21, 2011)

> The danger of these figureheads is that, in the minds of some, they become celebrities and gurus. Slavishly following them, their disciples reproduce not only much of what is good but also exaggerate them at their points of weakness or aberration.



I think I started out with this mindset but have moved away from it over the past few years. Like many of you, I was also YRR. However, I am not quite "truly Reformed" yet. I am closer than I was at the start. I am a five point Calvinist (which I have been from the start) but I would also describe myself now as a covenant theologian and I am closer to being a sabbatarian now than I was when I first embraced the doctrines of grace. So I am closer to a Reformed view of the Fourth commandment. I am also closer to a Reformed interpretation of the Second commandment.

I am not yet convinced of cessationism however. And, I'm not quite sure that I am convinced of the RPW either.

I see a lot of people mention a Reformed view of the sacraments around here. I'm not entirely sure what the difference is between a Reformed view of the sacraments and a broad evangelical view of the sacraments. Perhaps I should start a thread concerning that topic.


----------



## FenderPriest (Dec 21, 2011)

Potentially of interest to the discussion at hand: Kevin DeYoung - Whither YRR?


----------



## JM (Dec 21, 2011)

Thanks for the update.


----------



## rbcbob (Dec 21, 2011)

You are welcome, Jason.


----------



## Craig.Scott (Dec 21, 2011)

A good article from Kevin de Young, it is good to see that the New Calvinist movement needs to Reform, and let's all pray they do. 

Here's the lecture on New Calvinism by Walker The New Calvinism Considered - SermonAudio.com






In Christ


----------



## J. Dean (Dec 22, 2011)

So one can be Calvinist and not be Reformed? Would that be a correct assessment?


----------



## Zach (Dec 22, 2011)

The more I read from him, the more I realize that Kevin DeYoung is the man.


----------



## Andres (Dec 22, 2011)

J. Dean said:


> So one can be Calvinist and not be Reformed? Would that be a correct assessment?



In my opinion, which isn't worth much, yes, that's a correct assessment. I often make the distinction between "reformed" and confessionally reformed.


----------



## J. Dean (Dec 22, 2011)

Andres said:


> J. Dean said:
> 
> 
> > So one can be Calvinist and not be Reformed? Would that be a correct assessment?
> ...



That's what I'm gathering. Admittedly, I don't know a whole lot about the New Calvinist movement. I know that John MacArthur has a mildly skeptical take on it because he's worried that some of the NCM people are bringing emergent baggage with them into Calvinism, but beyond that the talk is that it's a resurgance and rediscovery of Calvinist doctrine (which is a good thing).


----------



## GulfCoast Presbyterian (Dec 22, 2011)

J. Dean said:


> So one can be Calvinist and not be Reformed? Would that be a correct assessment?



Yes, or "reformed in name only" like many PCUSA churches.


----------



## Craig.Scott (Dec 22, 2011)

J. Dean said:


> So one can be Calvinist and not be Reformed? Would that be a correct assessment?



Yes, for example John MacArthur is a Calvinist as he holds to the doctrines of Grace, but he is not reformed because the rest of his theology is not Reformed, be it Ecclesiology, Worship, or Eschatology.








In Christ


----------



## Pilgrim (Dec 22, 2011)

Rufus said:


> Thanks for sharing. I've found that the main problem with the "Young, Restless, and Reformed" crowd is that their not actually Reformed (as in they hold to "Calvinism" but don't understand/don't hold to covenant theology/a Reformed confession/a proper view of the Lords day or are fine with images of Christ). However I'm hopeful that through some means this will change and many of these "Calvinistic" baptists will become Reformed Baptists or Presbyterian/Dutch Reformed/etc.



There are a lot of Presbyterians who basically reject the 2nd and 4th Commandments. And that's not just non office holders, They are probably two of the most common exceptions taken to the WCF by ministerial candidates. Right or wrong, the confessional people here are viewed as extremists or "TR's" (Truly Reformed, an epithet that, to the uninitiated, roughly translates to fundamentalist or legalist) by many in broader PCA churches that do not emphasize confessionalism. That's not to mention the KJV toting Exclusive Psalmodists who subscribe to the original WCF! The last time I visited a PCA church, the pastor offered to take us out to lunch following Sunday morning service.

I think the articles by Walker and DeYoung are quite good. Perhaps DeYoung will change the title of his blog soon?


----------



## Weston Stoler (Dec 22, 2011)

Rufus said:


> Thanks for sharing. I've found that the main problem with the "Young, Restless, and Reformed" crowd is that their not actually Reformed (as in they hold to "Calvinism" but don't understand/don't hold to covenant theology/a Reformed confession/a proper view of the Lords day or are fine with images of Christ). However I'm hopeful that through some means this will change and many of these "Calvinistic" baptists will become Reformed Baptists or Presbyterian/Dutch Reformed/etc.
> 
> And by the way I was in many ways a "new calvinist" when I joined the Puritanboard, without this website I may have never learned the value of the sabbath, the importance of holding a confession, the regulative principle, why images of Christ are bad, and Presbyterianism.



I went from a new calvinistic Dispensational baptist to a presbyterian reforming hoping to be truly reformed. It happens


----------



## Jared (Dec 22, 2011)

Craig.Scott said:


> J. Dean said:
> 
> 
> > So one can be Calvinist and not be Reformed? Would that be a correct assessment?
> ...



However, a lot of YRR people don't want to call themselves Calvinists for a variety of reasons. First, Calvin has a bad reputation in some circles. Second, many evangelicals have the opposite perspective to many of the people on this board. That is, they see "Calvinist" as meaning that you follow Calvin on every point. They see the term "Reformed" on the other hand as a broader term that encompasses anyone who holds to the doctrines of grace.

I suppose that's why in some circles "monergist", "sovereign grace Christian", or "biblicist" is used instead.


----------



## Pilgrim (Dec 22, 2011)

Along with recognizing that within the past 5 years or so that many of the YRR's wouldn't have any interest in something like the PB anyway (given the abundance of resources from the Resurgence, TGC, etc which didn't exist in the early 2000's when you didn't have blogging or FB) I do think it's important to recognize that for some, becoming "Reformed" is merely a stop along the way instead of a destination. I think this is alluded to in one or more of these posts that have been linked to. 

When the Puritanboard started, I suppose you could say it was at the time that the "YRR" thing was starting to gel, with many having been influenced in a Reformed/Calvinist direction by MacArthur and Piper, among some others. This was several years prior to the first T4G conference, which I think took place in 2006. Hansen's book was also published around that time. I've been on here since mid 2005, and I think the board started around 2002. 

Those who have been here since the early-mid 2000's can probably think of at least a dozen or so names of people who came from some kind of Pentecostalism/Charismaticism or revivalist Semi-Pelagianism or whatever who were Reformed for a while only to eventually go into Roman Catholicism or Eastern Orthodoxy, often with a FV stage in between. And in many cases these were the most vocal in arguing for whatever distinctive they were espousing at the time, usually either some form of theonomy (or related issues) or exclusive psalmody. (I'm not looking to debate the latter ideas, but am only pointing out that those kinds of views can sometimes attract a certain kind of extreme personality, as with Reformed theology in general.) 

While there is certainly no obligation to continue posting on the Puritanboard  the number of "New Calvinist" types who left (or who never joined) after finding us to be extreme or ultra in our views far exceeds the number who have left Protestantism altogether. (I'm merely using the PB here as an example of the reactions to 100 proof Reformed Theology perhaps in the OPC sense, much less Covenanters and similar perspectives.) Some basically relegate us to the "fundamentalist, other" category, and that evidently includes some of the principal subjects of Hansen's book. Some will put those labels on you if you dare to question some aspect of what they're doing. (One's reaction to Mark Driscoll is always a good litmus test.) Some will give you no more time than throwing out those kind of epithets because interaction with those who differ to that degree is seen as a distraction. In that sense, some aren't much different in their approach than the kind of thing that they reacted against in the first place. 

I think the Young, Restless, Reformed title has become much more ubiquitous than Collin Hansen would have dreamed. (The more recent term "Gospel centered" might be a better fit, since many of the gurus for this movement are in their 60's and many of the young guys are around 30 if not pushing 40.) No doubt, as people get to the point in which they are no longer young, the restlessness will abate as well, unless it's a synonym for a broad evangelicalism that radically changes its approach every decade in a perceived need to meet the times. I've heard of some older Southern Baptist pastors (and nondenominational as well, knowing some personally) who were gung ho for Forty Days of Purpose in the early 2000's but who are now latching on to what the younger Reformed leaning guys like David Platt are doing. How much of this is chasing the latest fad and what seems to be working and how much of it is a genuine change of core beliefs is something that I can't answer. Time will only tell how many will stay the course with regard to their current convictions. The pendulum in evangelicalism has definitely swung in the Calvinist direction with regard to soteriology. The test will be to see how many continue in this broadly Calvinist theology when the next hot trend in evangelicalism comes along.


----------



## Pilgrim (Dec 22, 2011)

I think Jeremy Walker's commendations post is very helpful. Even if we see good things in those who aren't quite in our camp, when all we put into print is criticism, (which unfortunately is what I tend to do) it will look to some like we cannot appreciate anything about it at all even if we are in large agreement with them on many issues.


----------



## py3ak (Dec 22, 2011)

Pilgrim said:


> How much of this is chasing the latest fad and what seems to be working and how much of it is a genuine change of core beliefs is something that I can't answer.


That is a vital point. Even Calvinism can become a fad, and while it may be nice to be in style again, it also generates a lot of adherents who are with you merely as long as you are the bandwagon; next season they'll turn you in and wonder why they ever thought a tie that wide was acceptable wear.


----------



## Jared (Dec 22, 2011)

Pilgrim said:


> Along with recognizing that within the past 5 years or so that many of the YRR's wouldn't have any interest in something like the PB anyway (given the abundance of resources from the Resurgence, TGC, etc which didn't exist in the early 2000's when you didn't have blogging or FB) I do think it's important to recognize that for some, becoming "Reformed" is merely a stop along the way instead of a destination. I think this is alluded to in one or more of these posts that have been linked to.
> 
> When the Puritanboard started, I suppose you could say it was at the time that the "YRR" thing was starting to gel, with many having been influenced in a Reformed/Calvinist direction by MacArthur and Piper, among some others. This was several years prior to the first T4G conference, which I think took place in 2006. Hansen's book was also published around that time. I've been on here since mid 2005, and I think the board started around 2002.
> 
> ...



This is very true. The pastor at the Pentecostal church that my parents go to likes David Platt's book "Radical". But, he also preaches the prosperity gospel. Also, they send the kids from their college ministry to the Passsion Conference every year. Those kids are getting a very different message at Passion than they're getting at their church. But, the leadership probably doesn't even know the difference. They are probably just sending them there because it's the popular thing to do. 

I came to the doctrines of grace through the influence of the Passion movement. I guess that's partially why I have struggled so much with RPW. I have held the doctrines of grace for six years now. I have made some changes through the years, mostly in more of a "Truly Reformed" direction although I'm not quite there yet and I don't know if I'll ever get there. But, I am thankful for the challenging conversations that I have had here on the PB. I honestly didn't know when I joined what the differece was between "TR" and "YRR".


----------



## rbcbob (Dec 23, 2011)

*Original post updated 12/23/11*


----------



## Rufus (Dec 25, 2011)

Pilgrim said:


> Those who have been here since the early-mid 2000's can probably think of at least a dozen or so names of people who came from some kind of Pentecostalism/Charismaticism or revivalist Semi-Pelagianism or whatever who were Reformed for a while only to eventually go into Roman Catholicism or Eastern Orthodoxy, often with a FV stage in between. And in many cases these were the most vocal in arguing for whatever distinctive they were espousing at the time, usually either some form of theonomy (or related issues) or exclusive psalmody. (I'm not looking to debate the latter ideas, but am only pointing out that those kinds of views can sometimes attract a certain kind of extreme personality, as with Reformed theology in general.)



I can say that prior to becoming a "calvinist" (which was prior to me being Reformed) that I was tempted by Anabaptism, Christian pacifism, and such. I was convinced that modern Christians where a bunch of hypocrites who didn't do the right thing, etc. etc. etc. I can say I also at the same time that I thought being a monk in the Roman Catholic/Eastern Orthodox church would be a good thing to do (I also didn't see problems with the Roman Catholic church). I also spent some time watching TBN and the likes although I felt a bit disgusted when I saw the shows about money on. 

I was 14 at that time period, I'm not sure if I was even saved yet, I understood that Luther taught some idea called "Justification by Faith" and agreed but didn't understand what it meant. After an odd experience at a church (the pastor was on vacation so a guest preacher was there) where people started getting "baptized in the Holy Spirit". 

Skipping a head sometime I've felt temptations from the Roman Catholic church and Eastern Orthodoxy (even after being on the Puritanboard), I've realized those churches as false for various reasons, especially in the fact they contradict sacred scripture.


Perhaps overall we becoming discerning towards cookie cutter "moralistic thereputic deism" Christianity, but we end up not being discerning towards the FV, NPP, and the RCC/EO.


----------

