# Chuck Smith, Calvary Chapel, and their Ignorance Fest on Calvinism (James White)



## Blue Tick

Chuck Smith, Calvary Chapel, and their Ignorance Fest on Calvinism (James White)

[video=youtube;U8whxBj2fQY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8whxBj2fQY&feature=sub[/video]


----------



## PresbyDane

We SO need a James White in danish over here!

Great clip by the way


----------



## ewenlin

Very very very very frustrating.

Just like the old Dave Hunt stuff, the methodology and attitude used and portrayed by seemingly scholarly arminians is just 

 I'd ask. Seems easier to just leave them in their own lies and false doctrines than to try and engage them.


----------



## discipulo

he actually calls Calvinists cultists


----------



## Hebrew Student

This always bothered me about folks like Dave Hunt and Chuck Smith. I have found arminians, for example, in places like the Church of the Nazarene and the Assemblies of God who, while they strongly disagree with you, will accept you as a brother in Christ, and be very close Christian brothers and sisters. However, these guys are really leaning towards out and out hatred of fellow bretheren in Christ, and all because of an issue upon which our eternal salvation does not depend. Something tells me that maybe there is just a little imbalance here?

God Bless,
Adam


----------



## discipulo

Hebrew Student said:


> This always bothered me about folks like Dave Hunt and Chuck Smith. I have found arminians, for example, in places like the Church of the Nazarene and the Assemblies of God who, while they strongly disagree with you, will accept you as a brother in Christ, and be very close Christian brothers and sisters. However, these guys are really leaning towards out and out hatred of fellow bretheren in Christ, and all because of an issue upon which our eternal salvation does not depend. Something tells me that maybe there is just a little imbalance here?
> 
> God Bless,
> Adam



Good point, a guy like Gordon Fee interacts in a clean, irenic, dignified way.

Those guys like Smith or Hunt seem to suffer from a kind of spiritual jealousy, 

scholasticism would call that: Odium Theologicum


----------



## py3ak

He doesn't call them "cultists". He compares them to cultists on the score of learning a few proof texts and camping out there. The accusation is wrong (though no doubt some Calvinists do learn their 5 points and stop there), but it is not the same thing as saying "Calvinism is a cult."


----------



## Julio Martinez Jr

discipulo said:


> he actually calls Calvinists cultists



I actual heard something similar this past week about me. They said that the Presbyterians are all a cult, only because I did not want to debate something that was obviously going nowhere and all the comments were ad hominem. Sometimes you need to know when to call it quits with someone. Usually comments like this warrant *Proverbs 26:4* "Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest you be like him yourself."


----------



## Blue Tick

The problem with the CC boys is a lot of their experience with Calvinists and Reformed doctrine is from the internal "Converts" within CC. Here's the so common scenario, someone in CC stumbles upon the DoG is convinced of God's sovereignty in salvation, realize what they've been taught is all wrong, then go on the war path to correct everyone. As a result their "very zealous for truth", from the CC perspective this is "divisive" because CC paints an underlying attitude of having a monopoly on the truth of the Bible. Obviously they don't. So, to give them the benefit of the doubt most CC pastors and layman are only exposed to the recent converts to Reformed doctrine. Those beloved saints (me included at one time) who are on fire for the truth of God’s Word could be more gracious when dealing with CC people. Don’t get me the leaders should repent and turn from the idol of “Super-Free-Willism” but for reasons I don’t know God has left them in the dark on these issues.


----------



## Rich Koster

By me, there are 2 "Christian" radio stations on FM. The first is a K-LOVE network station, the other is 90.5 which plays mostly Calvary Chapel stuff. I listened for a while, but got worn out by their Dispensational rapture stuff  and their anti-Reformed comments . Therefore, if I do turn on the FM radio anymore it is to WRTI....classical by day, jazz by night. 

I was going to send a nastygram to the station expressing my disapproval of their Anti-Calvinist comments & poor doctrine, but decided to save the stamp. I have opposed leadership that was teaching garbage before, and all I ever got from it was worn out. It is amazing how many people follow blindly and never ask questions when something doesn't sit quite right. I have questioned bad doctrine and made some enemies just for asking. Pharisees don't like to explain themselves in an educated debate because they fear that the holes in their arguments will be exposed.


----------



## Jesus is my friend

It's funny that Dr. White is dead on right,My dear friends at Calvary would tell us to read our Bibles constantly and gave us that good biblical foundation and through it realized they were wrong on their soteriology and other issues too and just like Dr White said these people would read their Bibles,see the Truth and leave,(on good terms).We were one of those families among others who left,as much as we love our brothers there we are glad to be in a Reformed,Confessional Church that's all about God and His Glory

Thanks for posting this I will past it on with discernment


----------



## Sean Strupp

discipulo said:


> he actually calls Calvinists cultists



I have friends who attend a calvary chapel and their pastor has placed the Calvinists in the same camp as the Mormons and have been told that they are being unequally yoked with non-believers if they keep fellowship with the likes of us.

-----Added 10/6/2009 at 11:50:28 EST-----



Julio Martinez Jr said:


> discipulo said:
> 
> 
> 
> he actually calls Calvinists cultists
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I actual heard something similar this past week about me. They said that the Presbyterians are all a cult, only because I did not want to debate something that was obviously going nowhere and all the comments were ad hominem. Sometimes you need to know when to call it quits with someone. Usually comments like this warrant *Proverbs 26:4* "Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest you be like him yourself."
Click to expand...


wise choice


----------



## jason d

I went to Calvary Chapels for years and tried to be a "Closet Calvinist" but I just couldn't take all the Calvinist bashing... well that and when we were in Romans 9 it was just sad. This is frustrating but very common with those who are anti-Calvinist... they usually aren't even talking about true Calvinism


----------



## beej6

Since Calvinism is, simply, the most consistent form of Biblical Christianity, I can only conclude that those strident CC folks haven't read their Bibles well enough. Like any part of the OT, Romans, or Hebrews.


----------



## Scott1

This confirms my experience in engaging those who think themselves opposed to "Calvinism" (the "five points"). 

They attend Arminian-influenced, dispensational churches with no confession of faith for clarity or accountability. Some even imagine themselves "more spiritual" not having a confession.

They tend to know and articulate Arminianism, dispensationalism fairly well. They may know a standard list of objections to "Calvinism" but they do not understand Calvinism. These folks, though leaders who ought to have had more exposure to the Scripture and theology, really ought to know more of which they speak.

Notice how the second speaker, almost smugly says "they have their verses," referring I suppose to the systematic reformed theology (which blows their arguments away). But at the end, he says, "but we go by the Bible." Really? Then why won't you deal with "their" ("Calvinist") verses? Is he really not aware that what is now called "Calvinism" is the historic position of the church and that his (with the charismatic/pentecostal interventions) is of especially recent vintage?

Also, does he really so woefully misunderstand "the five points" to believe it says man has no will? Really?

Someone needs to send him a short letter explaining the use of the word 'will' in a decretal, dispositive and preceptive sense. He no doubt uses it himself in those different senses, with different intended meanings but apparently doesn't realize so does God's Word.

Rather than be dismayed at this ignorance, it ought encourage you to engage people who think this way. Many of these people are Christians, but woefully, embarrassingly ignorant of God's Word.


----------



## jason d

Scott1 said:


> ...it ought encourage you to engage people who think this way. Many of these people are Christians, but woefully, embarrassingly ignorant of God's Word.





It does, and if someone has a misunderstanding then I want to go to the Bible with them and show them their error (as I would want someone to do for me).

The thing with Calvary Chapel though (at least the ones I've attended and heard on the radio) is that they are trained to not engage with Calvinist and to just write them off as "Un-Biblical" and "followers of a man".

I know cause I was trained this way. Even in our bookstore we have more "Anti-Calvinist" book than any other subject.

Interesting thing is the majority of people at the church I go to now (which is Calvinistic) started off in Calvary Chapels, and since Calvary Chapels have a high view of verse by verse expository preaching you eventually wind up hitting lots of text that go against your Arminianism


----------



## Cary Loughman

On yesterday's DL, the one speaker spoke of Calvinism leaving out Jesus, but solely relies on Paul, which is obviously such an absurd view that it barely deserves a refutation. While Dr. White talked about "Red Letter Christians," what struck me is that Calvinism leaves out the CC version of "Jesus," the one where Jesus' death on the cross only makes us saveable. 

So, I agree, Calvinism does leave out their version of Jesus, but includes Jesus the Christ, the Jesus of Scripture, so named because he is the Savior of the world of all who will believe, not some potential savior "Jesus" that died for all and is not seated at the right hand of God with His fingers crossed on his nail scarred hands, hoping that some will accept his gift.

Calvinism is indeed guilty of leaving that Jesus out of its theology---all glory to God.


----------



## MMasztal

We have a CC here in town and a whole bunch of students' families in our school go there. From what I've read on their "position papers" on Calvinism and the overall Biblical knowledge of the students who attend there, I'd have to say they are theological lightweights afraid to address any difficult areas in the Bible. 

I'm teaching a theology class right now and have been hitting the doctrines of grace pretty heavily. It's apparent that the CC students really have no idea what the DoG are about. I've been getting some pretty bizarre responses from the students obviously from their parents in regards to the parents' (and CC's) interpretations of Romans 8 & 9. I'm waiting for a formal complaint to the principal. If that happens, I've determined to bring my Bible, give it to the parent and tell them to show me where I'm wrong. I'm not worried


----------



## KMK

I am one of those 'converts' Dr. White referred to. I came to the DoG partially because of the encouragement I received from Calvary pastors. As Dr. White mentions, one of the problems they face is an 'archbishop' type of ecclesiology. This ecclesiology is the reason I believe for CC's frustration over 'Reformation Theology', as Smith calls it. Because Smith is frustrated, this frustration trickles down. He grows up other pastors that are frustrated. And they grow up others, etc. Here is a quote from Smith that shows the inner battle that goes on inside his heart:



> I, like every other student in Bible college, wrestled with this issue. I was reading Arthur W. Pink's _The Sovereignty of God_. I got so confused because Pink stats that man has no choice in the issue of salvation. It is all up to God. There's no human responsibility. As I was reading the book, I got so confused that I finally stood up, took the paperback, and threw it across the room. I felt like Martin Luther throwing an ink well at the devil. I said, "God, I can't understand it." I was frustrated mentally. It was then that the Lord spoke to my heart and said, "I didn't ask you to understand it, I only asked you to believe My Word."
> 
> I rested from that point on. I still cannot in my mind rationalize the two positions. I can't bring the two together... Chuck Smith; _Calvary Distinctives_; pg. 125



I am thankful for the charity shown me by those at CC and hope that the Lord will soon resolve this issue in his mind.


----------



## lynnie

Chuck Missler is big with CC. He did an article a while back about how amilenialism was responsible for Hitler's holocaust and "replacement theology" (the church fills the promises to Israel) is heresy.


----------



## Blue Tick

KMK said:


> I am one of those 'converts' Dr. White referred to. I came to the DoG partially because of the encouragement I received from Calvary pastors. As Dr. White mentions, one of the problems they face is an 'archbishop' type of ecclesiology. This ecclesiology is the reason I believe for CC's frustration over 'Reformation Theology', as Smith calls it. Because Smith is frustrated, this frustration trickles down. He grows up other pastors that are frustrated. And they grow up others, etc. Here is a quote from Smith that shows the inner battle that goes on inside his heart:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I, like every other student in Bible college, wrestled with this issue. I was reading Arthur W. Pink's _The Sovereignty of God_. I got so confused because Pink stats that man has no choice in the issue of salvation. It is all up to God. There's no human responsibility. As I was reading the book, I got so confused that I finally stood up, took the paperback, and threw it across the room. I felt like Martin Luther throwing an ink well at the devil. I said, "God, I can't understand it." I was frustrated mentally. It was then that the Lord spoke to my heart and said, "I didn't ask you to understand it, I only asked you to believe My Word."
> 
> I rested from that point on. I still cannot in my mind rationalize the two positions. I can't bring the two together... Chuck Smith; _Calvary Distinctives_; pg. 125
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am thankful for the charity shown me by those at CC and hope that the Lord will soon resolve this issue in his mind.
Click to expand...



There are Christians within in CC who are very charitable and God fearing. Very thankful for one of my close friends still involved with CC.

I think Pastor Chuck fails to see that God can give us mental and intellectual trials not only physical trials. There have been many times in my life where I've had intellectual trials trying to work through certian biblical doctrines.

-----Added 10/7/2009 at 09:34:14 EST-----



lynnie said:


> Chuck Missler is big with CC. He did an article a while back about how amilenialism was responsible for Hitler's holocaust and "replacement theology" (the church fills the promises to Israel) is heresy.



Missler is a good example why businessmen should not exegete Scripture without any training. Missler is a big proponent of the Nephilim being the offspring of fallen angles and women.


----------



## Marrow Man

We have a former CC member (many years ago) who attends our church. He used to teach a cults class at CC, but he began to have problems with the dispensationalism taught. He came to Chuck Smith personally with some questions (not outright objections, but simply questions), and was unceremoniously dropped from his teaching duties.


----------



## Scott1

jason d said:


> Scott1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...it ought encourage you to engage people who think this way. Many of these people are Christians, but woefully, embarrassingly ignorant of God's Word.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It does, and if someone has a misunderstanding then I want to go to the Bible with them and show them their error (as I would want someone to do for me).
> 
> The thing with Calvary Chapel though (at least the ones I've attended and heard on the radio) is that they are trained to not engage with Calvinist and to just write them off as "Un-Biblical" and "followers of a man".
> 
> I know cause I was trained this way. Even in our bookstore we have more "Anti-Calvinist" book than any other subject.
> 
> Interesting thing is the majority of people at the church I go to now (which is Calvinistic) started off in Calvary Chapels, and since Calvary Chapels have a high view of verse by verse expository preaching you eventually wind up hitting lots of text that go against your Arminianism
Click to expand...


And Mr. Smith has done a remarkable job taking a basic gospel and some Bible teaching to a lost generation of young people from the 60's generation lifestyle. No doubt God has used him and that denomination to bring some to Himself, despite some error and problems.

As time has gone on, God is now calling out the foundation and it is being revealed with major errors- not only the Arminian influence and dispensationalism, but the lack of accountability of leadership and governance, lack of biblical practice of the sacraments, and an attitude centered too much around the person of the founder. These things can be repented of, changed and restored, only by God's grace.

Use your past experience to get access to these people, use it and trust God. Pray for those opportunities. They were there for a purpose. Don't worry so much about what you think the response will be, use the access and be faithful.

Explain that God saves us, we don't decide that, God does. Rely on Scripture, and trust the Holy Spirit to convict them and illuminate their understanding of this truth. Once that happens, we may be privileged to see more people move into the truths of the Sovereignty of God, and his continuous plan of redemption.


----------



## Rich Koster

Blue Tick said:


> KMK said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am one of those 'converts' Dr. White referred to. I came to the DoG partially because of the encouragement I received from Calvary pastors. As Dr. White mentions, one of the problems they face is an 'archbishop' type of ecclesiology. This ecclesiology is the reason I believe for CC's frustration over 'Reformation Theology', as Smith calls it. Because Smith is frustrated, this frustration trickles down. He grows up other pastors that are frustrated. And they grow up others, etc. Here is a quote from Smith that shows the inner battle that goes on inside his heart:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I, like every other student in Bible college, wrestled with this issue. I was reading Arthur W. Pink's _The Sovereignty of God_. I got so confused because Pink stats that man has no choice in the issue of salvation. It is all up to God. There's no human responsibility. As I was reading the book, I got so confused that I finally stood up, took the paperback, and threw it across the room. I felt like Martin Luther throwing an ink well at the devil. I said, "God, I can't understand it." I was frustrated mentally. It was then that the Lord spoke to my heart and said, "I didn't ask you to understand it, I only asked you to believe My Word."
> 
> I rested from that point on. I still cannot in my mind rationalize the two positions. I can't bring the two together... Chuck Smith; _Calvary Distinctives_; pg. 125
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am thankful for the charity shown me by those at CC and hope that the Lord will soon resolve this issue in his mind.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> There are Christians within in CC who are very charitable and God fearing. Very thankful for one of my close friends still involved with CC.
> 
> I think Pastor Chuck fails to see that God can give us mental and intellectual trials not only physical trials. There have been many times in my life where I've had intellectual trials trying to work through certian biblical doctrines.
> 
> -----Added 10/7/2009 at 09:34:14 EST-----
> 
> 
> 
> lynnie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Chuck Missler is big with CC. He did an article a while back about how amilenialism was responsible for Hitler's holocaust and "replacement theology" (the church fills the promises to Israel) is heresy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Missler is a good example why businessmen should not exegete Scripture without any training. Missler is a big proponent of the Nephilim being the offspring of fallen angles and women.
Click to expand...




He has more mystic stuff to help enlighten us than that.....


----------



## AThornquist

John 3.16!!!!!!


----------



## tdowns

*So true...*



Blue Tick said:


> The problem with the CC boys is a lot of their experience with Calvinists and Reformed doctrine is from the internal "Converts" within CC. Here's the so common scenario, someone in CC stumbles upon the DoG is convinced of God's sovereignty in salvation, realize what they've been taught is all wrong, then go on the war path to correct everyone. As a result their "very zealous for truth", from the CC perspective this is "divisive" because CC paints an underlying attitude of having a monopoly on the truth of the Bible. Obviously they don't. So, to give them the benefit of the doubt most CC pastors and layman are only exposed to the recent converts to Reformed doctrine. Those beloved saints (me included at one time) who are on fire for the truth of God’s Word could be more gracious when dealing with CC people. Don’t get me the leaders should repent and turn from the idol of “Super-Free-Willism” but for reasons I don’t know God has left them in the dark on these issues.



Been there, seen (and kinda did) that...


----------



## Julio Martinez Jr

Marrow Man said:


> We have a former CC member (many years ago) who attends our church. He used to teach a cults class at CC, but he began to have problems with the dispensationalism taught. He came to Chuck Smith personally with some questions (not outright objections, but simply questions), and was unceremoniously dropped from his teaching duties.



This reminds me of Rome. That's a bunch of immaturity. I can't believe people can't even ask questions now.


----------



## MMasztal

I just listened to this tripe by Chuck Smith. This is worse than I had expected. I knew they were lightweights, but believed they were quiet about the Reformed Christians. 

The reason he doesn't entertain questions about Calvinism is that he knows his theological groundings are weak. The explanation he gave for Romans 8:28-30 was absurd.

Since I just finished a 2 month study on Logic with my Theology class, I'm going to play this and dissect the numerous logical fallacies he commits with his comments.


----------



## Julio Martinez Jr

MMasztal said:


> I just listened to this tripe by Chuck Smith. This is worse than I had expected. I knew they were lightweights, but believed they were quiet about the Reformed Christians.
> 
> The reason he doesn't entertain questions about Calvinism is that he knows his theological groundings are weak. The explanation he gave for Romans 8:28-30 was absurd.
> 
> Since I just finished a 2 month study on Logic with my Theology class, I'm going to play this and dissect the numerous logical fallacies he commits with his comments.



That's awesome. Get them to think.


----------



## TheFleshProfitethNothing

What does one expect from the unbelievers out there? Well meaning?? HMM! To Whom? If they were to give UP their Will Worship, would they be believers then? Ask them about 'will worship' and let's see what they truly trust in.

Which of the MANY Christs out their...though there is only one, (the others are all the same in their basic doctine)...are they trusting in?


----------



## tlharvey7

Blue Tick said:


> The problem with the CC boys is a lot of their experience with Calvinists and Reformed doctrine is from the internal "Converts" within CC. Here's the so common scenario, someone in CC stumbles upon the DoG is convinced of God's sovereignty in salvation, realize what they've been taught is all wrong, then go on the war path to correct everyone. As a result their "very zealous for truth", from the CC perspective this is "divisive" because CC paints an underlying attitude of having a monopoly on the truth of the Bible. Obviously they don't. So, to give them the benefit of the doubt most CC pastors and layman are only exposed to the recent converts to Reformed doctrine. Those beloved saints (me included at one time) who are on fire for the truth of God’s Word could be more gracious when dealing with CC people. Don’t get me the leaders should repent and turn from the idol of “Super-Free-Willism” but for reasons I don’t know God has left them in the dark on these issues.



i agree with this post... it has been my experience that CC PPL think they are the foremost authorities on scripture, that they have cornered the market on truth in scripture. i was even lead to believe that Chuck Smith invented expository preaching! so CC thinks they are the authority on that as well. even more sad was a lack of fellowship between CC's in a 50 mile radius. it's a very weird thing... i would never recomend one attend a calvary chapel.
where are the elders in CC?


----------



## JoyFullMom

We went to a Calvary Chapel for a short time.

We heard *seminary training* scoffed...because "all you need is God's Word and the Holy Spirit". My husband and I joked that we all needed WWCSD bracelets because we heard "Chuck Smith teaches" or "Chuck Smith says" about e.v.e.r.y.t.h.i.n.g.

The pastor also led worship and wrote his own music. Every Sunday he proudly proclaimed that "we don't sing songs written by DEAD people". (Many of his songs were 7-11 songs, with long musical interludes....)

Yes, he went chapter by chapter, verse by verse...but the explanations of scripture were ATROCIOUS! He actually spent more time yakking about his week. He DID rail against calvinism and then when people left over it, he gossiped from the pulpit about them. (no names of course  ) He told lots of stories about being *persecuted* for his faith here...but they were mostly *big and bad* stories that centered around him getting in someone's face.

They had elders. We were young ourselves at the time...about 30. This guy that planted the church here came from CA and brought *his own elders*. He had been a youth leader and he brought a bunch of guys from his youth group, so all his *elders* were all young, single kids. (college age)

There was another CC *also* recently planted by *another* couple from CA. There was no fellowship, but rather a competitive spirit. They *said* they sought fellowship, but there was none. Frankly, we visited that one too and it was no better.

It was a short time for us. We left for MANY reasons...obviously. I'm quite shocked when I read favorable things about CC here. LOL! The bottom line was that my husband and I questioned him on some things he was saying in the pulpit, and he told us if we didn't like the way he preached, we could leave. So we did! 

-----Added 10/8/2009 at 08:27:02 EST-----

Oh! Forgot! The *best* part was when we left, they sent a 19/20yo *elder* to visit *me* while my husband was at work, to tell *me* to talk to my husband and tell him what a terrible decision he had made for us by removing us from *biblical preaching*. 

I had to bite my tongue to keep from telling him to not let the door hit him on the behind as he left.


----------



## Blue Tick

JoyFullMom said:


> We went to a Calvary Chapel for a short time.
> 
> We heard *seminary training* scoffed...because "all you need is God's Word and the Holy Spirit". My husband and I joked that we all needed WWCSD bracelets because we heard "Chuck Smith teaches" or "Chuck Smith says" about e.v.e.r.y.t.h.i.n.g.
> 
> The pastor also led worship and wrote his own music. Every Sunday he proudly proclaimed that "we don't sing songs written by DEAD people". (Many of his songs were 7-11 songs, with long musical interludes....)
> 
> Yes, he went chapter by chapter, verse by verse...but the explanations of scripture were ATROCIOUS! He actually spent more time yakking about his week. He DID rail against calvinism and then when people left over it, he gossiped from the pulpit about them. (no names of course  ) He told lots of stories about being *persecuted* for his faith here...but they were mostly *big and bad* stories that centered around him getting in someone's face.
> 
> They had elders. We were young ourselves at the time...about 30. This guy that planted the church here came from CA and brought *his own elders*. He had been a youth leader and he brought a bunch of guys from his youth group, so all his *elders* were all young, single kids. (college age)
> 
> There was another CC *also* recently planted by *another* couple from CA. There was no fellowship, but rather a competitive spirit. They *said* they sought fellowship, but there was none. Frankly, we visited that one too and it was no better.
> 
> It was a short time for us. We left for MANY reasons...obviously. I'm quite shocked when I read favorable things about CC here. LOL! The bottom line was that my husband and I questioned him on some things he was saying in the pulpit, and he told us if we didn't like the way he preached, we could leave. So we did!
> 
> -----Added 10/8/2009 at 08:27:02 EST-----
> 
> Oh! Forgot! The *best* part was when we left, they sent a 19/20yo *elder* to visit *me* while my husband was at work, to tell *me* to talk to my husband and tell him what a terrible decision he had made for us by removing us from *biblical preaching*.
> 
> I had to bite my tongue to keep from telling him to not let the door hit him on the behind as he left.




Seems to be the pattern for many people leaving CC.


----------



## Julio Martinez Jr

*JoyFullMom* said,


> Oh! Forgot! The *best* part was when we left, they sent a 19/20yo *elder* to visit *me* while my husband was at work, to tell *me* to talk to my husband and tell him what a terrible decision he had made for us by removing us from *biblical preaching*.


What? CC actually did home visits?


----------



## tlharvey7

Blue Tick said:


> The problem with the CC boys is a lot of their experience with Calvinists and Reformed doctrine is from the internal "Converts" within CC. Here's the so common scenario, someone in CC stumbles upon the DoG is convinced of God's sovereignty in salvation, realize what they've been taught is all wrong, then go on the war path to correct everyone. As a result their "very zealous for truth", from the CC perspective this is "divisive" because CC paints an underlying attitude of having a monopoly on the truth of the Bible. Obviously they don't. So, to give them the benefit of the doubt most CC pastors and layman are only exposed to the recent converts to Reformed doctrine. Those beloved saints (me included at one time) who are on fire for the truth of God’s Word could be more gracious when dealing with CC people. Don’t get me the leaders should repent and turn from the idol of “Super-Free-Willism” but for reasons I don’t know God has left them in the dark on these issues.





Julio Martinez Jr said:


> *JoyFullMom* said,
> 
> 
> 
> Oh! Forgot! The *best* part was when we left, they sent a 19/20yo *elder* to visit *me* while my husband was at work, to tell *me* to talk to my husband and tell him what a terrible decision he had made for us by removing us from *biblical preaching*.
> 
> 
> 
> What? CC actually did home visits?
Click to expand...


you guys must have been faithful tithers to warrant such a visit


----------



## Julio Martinez Jr

JoyFullMom said:


> We went to a Calvary Chapel for a short time.
> 
> We heard *seminary training* scoffed...because "all you need is God's Word and the Holy Spirit". My husband and I joked that we all needed WWCSD bracelets because we heard "Chuck Smith teaches" or "Chuck Smith says" about e.v.e.r.y.t.h.i.n.g.
> 
> The pastor also led worship and wrote his own music. Every Sunday he proudly proclaimed that "we don't sing songs written by DEAD people". (Many of his songs were 7-11 songs, with long musical interludes....)
> 
> Yes, he went chapter by chapter, verse by verse...but the explanations of scripture were ATROCIOUS! He actually spent more time yakking about his week. He DID rail against calvinism and then when people left over it, he gossiped from the pulpit about them. (no names of course  ) He told lots of stories about being *persecuted* for his faith here...but they were mostly *big and bad* stories that centered around him getting in someone's face.
> 
> They had elders. We were young ourselves at the time...about 30. This guy that planted the church here came from CA and brought *his own elders*. He had been a youth leader and he brought a bunch of guys from his youth group, so all his *elders* were all young, single kids. (college age)
> 
> There was another CC *also* recently planted by *another* couple from CA. There was no fellowship, but rather a competitive spirit. They *said* they sought fellowship, but there was none. Frankly, we visited that one too and it was no better.
> 
> It was a short time for us. We left for MANY reasons...obviously. I'm quite shocked when I read favorable things about CC here. LOL! The bottom line was that my husband and I questioned him on some things he was saying in the pulpit, and he told us if we didn't like the way he preached, we could leave. So we did!
> 
> -----Added 10/8/2009 at 08:27:02 EST-----
> 
> Oh! Forgot! The *best* part was when we left, they sent a 19/20yo *elder* to visit *me* while my husband was at work, to tell *me* to talk to my husband and tell him what a terrible decision he had made for us by removing us from *biblical preaching*.
> 
> I had to bite my tongue to keep from telling him to not let the door hit him on the behind as he left.





tlharvey7 said:


> Blue Tick said:
> 
> 
> 
> The problem with the CC boys is a lot of their experience with Calvinists and Reformed doctrine is from the internal "Converts" within CC. Here's the so common scenario, someone in CC stumbles upon the DoG is convinced of God's sovereignty in salvation, realize what they've been taught is all wrong, then go on the war path to correct everyone. As a result their "very zealous for truth", from the CC perspective this is "divisive" because CC paints an underlying attitude of having a monopoly on the truth of the Bible. Obviously they don't. So, to give them the benefit of the doubt most CC pastors and layman are only exposed to the recent converts to Reformed doctrine. Those beloved saints (me included at one time) who are on fire for the truth of God’s Word could be more gracious when dealing with CC people. Don’t get me the leaders should repent and turn from the idol of “Super-Free-Willism” but for reasons I don’t know God has left them in the dark on these issues.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Julio Martinez Jr said:
> 
> 
> 
> *JoyFullMom* said,
> 
> 
> 
> Oh! Forgot! The *best* part was when we left, they sent a 19/20yo *elder* to visit *me* while my husband was at work, to tell *me* to talk to my husband and tell him what a terrible decision he had made for us by removing us from *biblical preaching*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What? CC actually did home visits?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> you guys must have been faithful tithers to warrant such a visit
Click to expand...


How true. I think they wanted to secure their investments. LOL. I can only imagine a dialog now:

Calvary Chapel Elder: You can't leave. Tell you husband we will be in touch.
_Agents walk away as they put on their oakley shades_
Non-member Member: Sorry but we already left. Sorry for the trouble.
CCE: We'll keep in touch.

Resounds of the Matrix, doesn't it? I can almost see the surreal look on Morpheus' face.


----------



## DMcFadden

CC has been the entry point into Christianity for many (just as Billy Graham or Jack Hayford). I concur with all of the scare stories. They are indeed horrible. But, try to remember that these are brothers and sisters in Christ. Many of the Reformed and Calvinistic folks I know started out in CC. No need to spend ALL of our time spitting on the carpet in our common living room just to prove that we got all of the "taste" of CC out of our mouths.

Does Pastor Chuck make chowderhead comments? You betcha. So do most mainline, broad evangelical, and all too many fully Reformed people. Look at the FV!!! That one started in REFORMED circles, not in a CC. I make no room for Arminian twaddle in my system of belief, but neither do I want to head back to Rome as some of our eminent "Reformed" luminaries who seem to be heading in that direction.

Will God bring some people to himself through CC? Probably more than will ever hear the Gospel in a micro-Presbyterian denomination. Does that justify Smith's errors? Not in the least. In my mind Norm Geisler and Chuck Smith have both done great things for God DESPITE the HUGE and HORRIBLE errors in their systems (e.g., their manifestly DUMB comments about Calvinism).

When I hear ignorant ruminations by Smith, Geisler, the Emergent Gurus, et. al., it makes me wonder why the Lord puts up with any of us. We are such cracked pots, aren't we?


----------



## JoyFullMom

I agree they are our brothers and sisters, even though, they did cut all ties with *us*. 

But, I am ROFL at the home visit comments. I can't wait to let my husband read this! LOL!


----------



## Julio Martinez Jr

JoyFullMom said:


> I agree they are our brothers and sisters, even though, they did cut all ties with *us*.
> 
> But, I am ROFL at the home visit comments. I can't wait to let my husband read this! LOL!



I'm glad you like the dialog. It was all natural. lol. Maybe I can write a more elaborative dialog for the group's entertainment.


----------



## eqdj

Jesus is my friend said:


> It's funny that Dr. White is dead on right,My dear friends at Calvary would tell us to read our Bibles constantly and gave us that good biblical foundation and through it realized they were wrong on their soteriology and other issues too and just like Dr White said these people would read their Bibles,see the Truth and leave,(on good terms).We were one of those families among others who left,as much as we love our brothers there we are glad to be in a Reformed,Confessional Church that's all about God and His Glory
> 
> Thanks for posting this I will past it on with discernment




That was my experience as well


----------



## Amazing Grace

CC, as a rule, follows expository V by V teaching. One possible result of this style is a lack of cohesiveness and no woven theme throughout the scripture. Without a Systematic Approach, you do not acknowledge the Analogy of Scripture and most likely will end denying Calvinism.


----------



## KMK

Amazing Grace said:


> CC, as a rule, follows expository V by V teaching. One possible result of this style is a lack of cohesiveness and no woven theme throughout the scripture. Without a Systematic Approach, you do not acknowledge the Analogy of Scripture and most likely will end denying Calvinism.



Glad your back, AG! And I agree with you.


----------



## Amazing Grace

KMK said:


> Amazing Grace said:
> 
> 
> 
> CC, as a rule, follows expository V by V teaching. One possible result of this style is a lack of cohesiveness and no woven theme throughout the scripture. Without a Systematic Approach, you do not acknowledge the Analogy of Scripture and most likely will end denying Calvinism.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Glad your back, AG! And I agree with you.
Click to expand...


Good to be back KMK. I used to listen to CS years ago prior to my conversion to RT(Reformed Theology). I remember him specifically saying that V by V teaching allows one to approach the bible with no bias or presuppositions. Since he is a good salesman, I agreed at first, but found myself in a maze of contradictions that I was told all must be true. The irony I found is out of one side of his mouth he would proclaim tolerance to all understanding within the broad Christian denominations, then bash Calvinism. "We welcome all to CC" then backdoor the denigration of RT.


----------



## KMK

Amazing Grace said:


> CC, as a rule, follows expository V by V teaching. One possible result of this style is a lack of cohesiveness and no woven theme throughout the scripture. Without a Systematic Approach, you do not acknowledge the Analogy of Scripture and most likely will end denying Calvinism.



I just ran across this by Lloyd-Jones this morning:



> I would lay down a general proposition that preaching must always be theological, always based on a theological foundation. We should be particularly careful when we preach on isolated texts and deal with each one separately. The reason for that, of course, is that we may well find ourselves becoming guilty of contradictions. We deliver a message on the basis of one text, but because it is not related to others, and to the whole truth, when we come to deal with another text we may say something that contradicts what we have said in the first sermon. _Preaching and Preachers_; pg. 64


----------

