# What is new Calvinism?



## Edm (Mar 31, 2016)

I see this title, when I try to look it up I just find names of people who are "new Calvinist" it looks like most listed are Baptist. What are the beliefs of a " new Calvinist" as opposed to a regular Calvinist? Serious question...I keep seeing young restless and reformed. That tells me nothing.

Thanks


----------



## arapahoepark (Mar 31, 2016)

By and large New Calvinism refers to to the resurgence of predestinarianism among evangelicals particularly prominent pastors. It takes many forms but they are still largely non denominational, 4 to 5 point Calvinists who don't adhere to the confessions or covenant theology.


----------



## MW (Mar 31, 2016)

Edm said:


> What are the beliefs of a " new Calvinist" as opposed to a regular Calvinist?



A helpful analysis and critique may be found here:

http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=102513165749


----------



## Tom Hart (Mar 31, 2016)

It seems to me that so-called 'New Calvinism' is a slight departure from the historic Reformed faith. The new Calvinists often like Calvin (or they have at least heard of him) and the doctrines of grace, but they throw in a bunch of other stuff.

Tim Keller, I think, could be put in this category. What Reformation-era theologian would ever have espoused the things Keller believes about Genesis or Roman Catholicism?

Others would probably include Mark Driscoll, who is practically antinomian – lots of grace but not much repentance (ie. 'Jesus loves your tattoos.')

The hugely popular John Piper would fit here too. It seems he has slightly more fluid positions on some things, such as eschatology. His idea of 'Christian hedonism' is also suspect. Also, Piper is a fan of Mark Driscoll and thinks Rick Warren is 'deeply theological'. It's not that a theologian or pastor has to be perfect, but Piper's thinking is peppered with some questionable stuff.

I do not think that all these new Calvinist preachers are all bad, but they should not be placed within the realm of historical Reformed Christianity. Their teachings are a modern twist on Calvinism. (Tim Keller is obsessed with words like 'postmodern'.) They can be instruments to lead people to Christ (I was helped a lot by John Piper when I was younger) but I'd hope that people graduate from this New Calvinism.


----------



## DMcFadden (Mar 31, 2016)

Reformed theology is a system, of which soteriology is a necessary, but not sufficient, element with which to construct the entire superstructure. It includes covenant theology, Presbyterian polity, classic eschatology, emphasis upon Word and Sacrament, and the regulative principle of worship. 

in my opinion, the "New Calvinists" are mostly made up of formerly broad evangelicals who have discovered the intellectual and spiritual satisfactions of Calvin's soteriology. They may be charismatic-lite (e.g., Grudem and Piper), baptistic in polity, premillennial, non-sacramental, and even non-covenantal in theological structure,

Over the years we have argued on the PB whether "Reformed Baptists" are truly Reformed. With respect to the so-called "new Calvinists," the appropriation of the descriptive is even more suspect. Merely believing in a limited atonement does not a "Calvinist" make.


----------



## Edm (Mar 31, 2016)

I don't know much about piper, or Keller. I did see that A l mueller was considered a new Calvinist. I do enjoy listening to him. I see the difference between me and him as... Baptism and church government. Maybe more...but are the others different?


----------



## DMcFadden (Apr 1, 2016)

Many are some version of Baptist (Reformed, General Conference, or SBC) - Piper, Chandler, Dever, Mohler, and Grudem). During colonial days the vast majority of Baptists were soteriological Calvinists. But, by the middle of the last century, the vast majority of Baptists were some version of Arminian. It has been a signal accomplishment of Al Mohler at one of the largest seminaries in the world (Southern), that more than 1/3 of the grads are emerging as 5-pt Calvinists soteriologically.

Other "new Calvinists" (Keller) are PCA, charismatic (Harris), or non-denominational (Driscoll). John MacArthur clainms to be a "leaky dispensationalist" and a 5 pt Calvinist. He retains his defense of "left behind" rapture eschatology.

So, if you think of Calvinism as a system also known as "Reformed," then the "new" Calvinism will seem more like Calvinism "lite;" double predestination coupled with a bewildering array of broad evangelical themes and theologies.


----------



## C. M. Sheffield (Apr 1, 2016)

Here is a helpful book by Jeremy Walker (a Reformed Baptist )on the topic: The New Calvinism Considered: A Personal and Pastoral Assessment

I think he does a good job of being honest and fair.


----------



## deathtolife (Apr 1, 2016)

The book C.M. Sheffield has recommended is a helpful resource. 

If you cannot read the book, here is a video of pastor Jeremy Walker teaching some of the material. Though theological elitism and pride is common in so many reformed circles, it is not in this message. As the video description suggests, it is a message with grace, truth, encouragments and warnings.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQ9mZZ1SBkM


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Apr 1, 2016)

DMcFadden said:


> Many are some version of Baptist (Reformed, General Conference, or SBC) - Piper, Chandler, Dever, Mohler, and Grudem). During colonial days the vast majority of Baptists were soteriological Calvinists. But, by the middle of the last century, the vast majority of Baptists were some version of Arminian. It has been a signal accomplishment of Al Mohler at one of the largest seminaries in the world (Southern), that more than 1/3 of the grads are emerging as 5-pt Calvinists soteriologically.
> 
> Other "new Calvinists" (Keller) are PCA, charismatic (Harris), or non-denominational (Driscoll). John MacArthur clainms to be a "leaky dispensationalist" and a 5 pt Calvinist. He retains his defense of "left behind" rapture eschatology.
> 
> So, if you think of Calvinism as a system also known as "Reformed," then the "new" Calvinism will seem more like Calvinism "lite;" double predestination coupled with a bewildering array of broad evangelical themes and theologies.



A helpful summary. I think it can be articulated as a love for the headers of TULIP without working out the Biblical and Systematic theology that undergirds it.


----------



## Pilgrim (Apr 1, 2016)

A good many "New Calvinists" reject limited atonement to one degree or another. This was Driscoll's view. (Maybe it still is if he still considers himself to be some kind of Calvinist.) And it is the view of some of the Southern Baptists. Not even all of the Gospel Coalition people are 5 pointers. So "New Calvinism" does not even necessitate Limited Atonement. 

MacArthur and his close followers (I suppose it could be considered MacArthurism at this point with all the TMS grads) wouldn't be considered "New Calvinist" because of his strident anti-charismaticism, his pre-tribulationism, and what the New Calvinists would consider to be fundamentalism, more or less. I'm referring to "traditional" worship, cultural conservatism, wearing suits, teetotalism, etc. The fact that a predestinarian isn't confessional doesn't make him a New Calvinist. A lot of them have viewed MacArthur with open disdain for these reasons. Other than Calvinistic soteriology, he basically represents everything they are reacting against.

With the exception of some of the Southern Baptists, all or almost all of the "New Calvinists" are either charismatic or continuationist. Hardly any, if any, affirm dispensational eschatology. A good many are amil. On the other hand, they also reject covenant theology. This appears to include almost everybody at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary where something called Progressive Covenantalism is being taught. This is most similar to New Covenant Theology, but it is not identical.

WRT Southern Seminary, I'd be very surprised if only 1/3 of the graduates affirm TULIP. I think it is 1/3 of the graduates of all of the SBC seminaries. And if it is the study I'm thinking of, Southern wasn't even part of that poll for some reason.


----------



## DMcFadden (Apr 1, 2016)

Pilgrim said:


> WRT Southern Seminary, I'd be very surprised if only 1/3 of the graduates affirm TULIP. I think it is 1/3 of the graduates of all of the SBC seminaries. And if it is the study I'm thinking of, Southern wasn't even part of that poll for some reason.



Thanks, Chris, for correcting my inaccurate memory of the research findings. I was thinking of Ed Stetzer's work for LifeWay. You are correct that the number of Calvinist seminary grads was found to be about 1/3 of all grads from their several seminaries. His (now dated) data concluded:


> Calvinism is a growing influence among Southern Baptist leaders with about 10 percent affirming the five points of Calvinism. However, when we look at recent SBC seminary graduates who now serve as church pastors, nearly 30 percent identify themselves as Calvinists.
> Congregations led by Calvinists tend to show a smaller attendance and typically baptize fewer people each year. The data doesn't explain why these churches are smaller.
> Even though churches with Calvinist leadership baptize fewer people each year, their baptism rate is virtually identical to churches led by non-Calvinists. The baptism rate is the percentage of annual baptisms relative to the total average worship attendance, a statistic used to measure evangelistic vitality.
> Both Calvinistic and non-Calvinistic leaders believe local congregations should be involved in sponsoring missions and planting new churches. The two studies showed 95 percent of both leadership types affirmed the necessity of missions and church planting.
> Recent graduates who are Calvinistic report that they conduct personal evangelism at a slightly higher rate than their non-Calvinistic peers.



As to your comment about the ratio of charismatic/continuaionist views to non-charismatic ones, it is widely stated, but confuses me. If a goodly percentage of the "new Calvinists" are SBC and are non-charismatic, why do so many say that "all or almost all of the 'New Calvinists' are either charismatic or continuationist"? I would have thought that the size of the SBC (if between 10% and 30% of the clergy are soteriological Calvinists) would dwarf the Piper, Driscoll, Harris types. Are there more "new Calvinists" in the charismatic ranks than in the SBC???


----------



## Edm (Apr 1, 2016)

I started wondering when I read that Mouler was one. I am Presbyterian, but due to a lack of PCA churches here I attend a SBC , where the pastor is on staff at Southen Seminary. they defiantly have a more casual service than I prefer, and the music isn't what I would chose...but his preaching is solid and the Sunday school class we are in is fantastic. I am gonna reason he is a " new Calvinist" 

Either way it is WAY better than what I had come to expect from SBC churches.


----------



## Pilgrim (Apr 1, 2016)

DMcFadden said:


> As to your comment about the ratio of charismatic/continuaionist views to non-charismatic ones, it is widely stated, but confuses me. If a goodly percentage of the "new Calvinists" are SBC and are non-charismatic, why do you say that "all or almost all of the 'New Calvinists' are either charismatic or continuationist"? I would have thought that the size of the SBC (if between 10% and 30% of the clergy are soteriological Calvinists) would dwarf the Piper, Driscoll, Harris types. Are there more "new Calvinists" in the charismatic ranks than in the SBC???




My apologies for being unclear. Many of the people in the SBC I was thinking of when I said they were less cessationist are in academia, which tends to be more cessationist from what I've seen. (I don't know whether or not cessationism as a condition of employment is currently official policy at any of the entities.) I think all of them still have to take a pledge to abstain from alcohol as well. I was basically trying to say that it is likely that a higher percentage of "New Calvinists" in the SBC are cessationist compared with New Calvinists outside of it, whether in doctrine or for all practical purposes even if they reject the usual arguments for cessation. On the other hand, there are a good number of churches that are dually affiliated with the SBC and Acts 29. I don't know that the Acts 29 churches are all full blown charismatic, but I wouldn't think that many are cessationist either. 

I have no idea what the percentages would be. But a lot of the younger guys (meaning pastors) in the SBC are or have been continuationist (open but cautious) if nothing else. Many aren't persuaded by Warfield's arguments for cessation, for example. The New Calvinist go to ST text generally is Grudem. Even though they may not totally endorse the Third Wave Vineyard teachings that Grudem was an apologist for back in the 80s, a good many seem to be closer to him than they are to traditional Reformed or Baptist views on the gifts. Although he does not speak in tongues, John Piper (one of the biggest influences in the rise of "New Calvinism") is also clearly on the charismatic side of the fence. Some years ago, the Desiring God website even had a glowing tribute to John Wimber. 

That being said, in practice some of them might as well be cessationist. One pastor who is of a SBC background basically told me he was continuationist 3-4 years ago, unless I misunderstood him. He seemed favorably disposed toward Sovereign Grace Ministries. But then he gave a series of messages on 1 Cor last year, many of which could have come out of MacArthur's "Charismatic Chaos" or "Strange Fire." This area being a hotbed of all manner of Pentecostalism and charismaticism may have something to do with it. It may be that some have become more "conservative" or cautious after being in the pastorate for a while and having a closer look at the harm that charismaticism often tends to create among those laypeople who tend to be less discerning. 

The "New Calvinism" became a "thing" in the early 2000s, roughly coinciding with the Emergent Church thing. Some "New Calvinists" I can think of have gone in different directions since then, some for the better and some for the worse. Much of what I'm conveying is what I've seen on FB and blogs, (which is where it was disseminated to a large degree) and a lot of that was in the 2009-2011 time frame. 

Remember, practically all a church has to do to be in cooperation with the SBC is send them a small amount of money and not have women or homosexuals in leadership. A church need not even be a member of the local association. So there is a wide variation in doctrine. My point was that a lot of the "New Calvinists" have taken their theological cues from the likes of Piper and Driscoll rather than the somewhat more traditionalist Mohler, much less a 1689er like Nettles. 

Conservative Southern Baptists for much of the past century have probably been more influenced by non-Southern Baptist (and sometimes even non-Baptist) theology than they have by what is taught in their own seminaries. Of course, a lot of this was because many of the seminaries went liberal. This resorting to non-SBC and even non-Baptist conservative theology may have began with Scofield and continued with Boice, Schaeffer, MacArthur and so on. Of course, with the turnaround at SBTS (that led to a turnaround at SEBTS, etc.) that has changed over the past generation. But note how many of those early faculty of the Mohler era came out of TEDS, Fuller or elsewhere (e.g. Ware, Schreiner, etc.) A lot of the young men coming in to SBTS over the past decade or so were already turned on by Piper, Driscoll, Keller or whoever when in college. So what in large part what Mohler (and Akin at SEBTS) did was foster an environment in which these guys could come in and remain SBC. A lot of the young guys sort of had one foot out the door 10 years or so ago with the condemnation of Calvinism by "traditionalists," much less Driscollism. This is probably one reason why you didn't see open condemnation of even Driscoll's worst excesses. Perhaps there was a fear of losing the young guys who could perhaps be eventually influenced down a more sound path. 

Now that David Platt is at the helm of the International Mission Board, the ban on charismatic missionaries (i.e. those that have a "private prayer language") that was in effect for about 10 years has also been lifted. I don't know how many people were prohibited from going into the field due to that policy.


----------



## Pilgrim (Apr 1, 2016)

Edm said:


> I started wondering when I read that Mouler was one. I am Presbyterian, but due to a lack of PCA churches here I attend a SBC , where the pastor is on staff at Southen Seminary. they defiantly have a more casual service than I prefer, and the music isn't what I would chose...but his preaching is solid and the Sunday school class we are in is fantastic. I am gonna reason he is a " new Calvinist"
> 
> Either way it is WAY better than what I had come to expect from SBC churches.



The definition of "New Calvinist" has a lot to do with who is using it. A "traditional" Arminian or Semi-Pelagian SBC pastor is going to use the term differently than a confessional Presbyterian or Baptist would. To the "traditionalist" SBC people, almost any Calvinist is a "New Calvinist," especially if they drink. And a lot of them will call a 4 pointer a Calvinist and a 5 pointer a hyper-Calvinist. 

SBC churches that have "traditional" worship (meaning an organ or piano and hymns rather than a "praise team") seem to be pretty few and far between these days. And I've been dismayed at the number of "New Calvinist" types that are now embracing practices like Lent. They may not be Calviphobic in general, but many are they are certainly anti-Puritan when it comes to worship. They cite the "Founders" of the SBC and other old Baptists to show the pedigree of Calvinism among Baptists. But they basically reject their views on worship.


----------



## DMcFadden (Apr 1, 2016)

Chris, all of that was VERY helpful. I was ABCUSA during my Baptist days and only know the SBC in an academic and anecdotal way. I had heard the charismatic descriptor applied to the "new Calvinists" and had wondered how that could be reconciled with Mohler's influence on the SBC or MacArthur's impact on conservative evangelicals generally. 

With something like a gazillion copies in print (actually 500,000+) one can hardly overestimate the varied impact of Grudem on evangelicalism. Harvard pedigree (in Economics) with a year at Fuller before transfer to Westminster; PhD at Cambridge on the continuation of prophecy; apologist for the Vineyard as you indicated; 5pt-er soteriologically; Baptist polity and view of the ordinances; complementarian opponent of egalitarianism; historic premillennialist.

But, that is why I agree with Scott Clark that the term "Calvinism" is misapplied to guys like Driscoll, Harris, or Grudem. The intrinsic and essential elements of Reformed thought are not necessarily present, and more often than not, notable by their absence.


----------



## TylerRay (Apr 5, 2016)

I heard Joel Beeke address this once--I can't seem to find it! I think it was at the Metropolitan Tabernacle, but I may be mistaken.

He noted that while the New Calvinists have embraced a Reformed soteriology, they have not embraced a Reformed ecclesiology or ethic. I found that very helpful.


----------



## Tom Hart (Apr 6, 2016)

C. M. Sheffield said:


> The New Calvinism Considered: A Personal and Pastoral Assessment



After the recommendation of C.M. Sheffield I just finished reading this book by Jeremy Walker. It is a very helpful little volume. I've been given much to think about.


----------

