Posted on 03/14/2015 6:16:23 AM PDT by SoFloFreeper
My friend Michael Horton often comments on the phenomenon of “cage-stage Calvinism,” that strange malady that seems to afflict so many people who have just seen the truth of the Reformed doctrines of grace. We’ve all known one of these “cage-stage Calvinists.” Many of us were even one of them when we were first convinced of God’s sovereignty in salvation.
Cage-stage Calvinists are identifiable by their insistence on turning every discussion into an argument for limited atonement or for making it their personal mission to ensure everyone they know hears—often quite loudly—the truths of divine election. Now, having a zeal for the truth is always commendable. But a zeal for the truth that manifests itself in obnoxiousness won’t convince anyone of the biblical truth of Reformed theology. As many of us can attest from personal experience, it will actually push them away.
Roger Nicole, the late Swiss Reformed theologian and colleague of mine for several decades, once remarked that all human beings are by nature semi-Pelagian, believing that they are not born as slaves to sin. In this country, particularly, we have been indoctrinated into a humanistic understanding of anthropology, especially with respect to our understanding of human freedom. This is the land of the free, after all. We don’t want to believe that we are burdened by negative inclinations and outright enmity toward God, as the Bible teaches us (Rom. 3:9–20). We think that true freedom means having the ability to come to faith without the vanquishing power of saving grace. When we realize that this is not true, that Scripture paints a bleak picture of the human condition apart from grace, that it says it is impossible for us to choose rightly, we want to make sure that everybody else knows it as well. Sometimes we are even angry that no one told us about the true extent of our depravity and the majesty of God’s sovereign grace before.
This gives birth to cage-stage Calvinists, those newly minted Reformed believers who are so aggressive and impatient that they should be locked in a cage for a little while so that they can cool down and mature a little in the faith. At times, someone who becomes convinced of the biblical doctrines of grace finds himself in conflict with friends and family because of his discovery of Reformed theology. More than once I’ve been asked how one should handle hostility from loved ones regarding Reformed theology. If Reformed convictions are causing problems, should one just drop the subject altogether? Are we responsible for convincing others of the truth of the doctrines of grace?
The answer is both yes and no. First let’s consider the “no.” Scripture says that “neither he who plants nor he who waters is anything, but only God who gives the growth” (1 Cor. 3:7). Paul is speaking primarily of evangelism in that verse, but I think we can apply it to growth in Christ even after conversion. The Holy Spirit convinces us of truth, and one’s coming to embrace Reformed theology shows this quite clearly. Given our semi-Pelagian inclinations, it takes a tremendous amount of exposure to the Word of God to overcome that natural bias against the doctrines of grace. People hold tenaciously to a particular view of free will that is not taught in Scripture. Calvin once remarked that if you mean by free will a will that is unencumbered by the weight of sin, you’ve used a term that’s far too exalted to apply to us. It takes a lot to overcome the exalted view that most sinners have of themselves. Only the Spirit can finally convince people of His truth.
Recognizing the Spirit’s work, however, does not mean we are silent or stop believing the truth of Scripture. We don’t give up the doctrines of grace to keep peace in the family or with friends. John Piper puts it well when he says that we not only have to believe the truth, that it’s not enough even to defend the truth, but we must also contend for the truth. That does not mean, however, that we are to be contentious people by nature. So yes, we are to share what we have learned about God’s sovereign grace with those around us.
However, if we really believe the doctrines of grace, we learn how to be gracious about it. When we remember how long it took us to get past the difficulties we once had with the full biblical picture of divine sovereignty and our enslavement to sin, we can view our non-Reformed friends and family more sympathetically and share the truth with them more graciously. One of the first things a person who is excited about his discovery of the doctrines of grace must learn quickly is to be patient with friends and family. God took time with us to convince us of His sovereignty in salvation. We can trust Him to do the same with those we love.
Not compromising His Word, but staying grounded IN it while at the same time showing patience with those who reject Him is the way of the Kingdom.
Hope this helps somebody. I know it helped me.
So, to paraphrase your comment, those who reject Reformed theology are rejecting Jesus? Quite simply put, that is the hallmark of the cult.
To paraphrase Dr. John R. Rice, there is nothing in the Bible supporting the premise that sinners are so totally depraved and so incapable of repentance, except as God calls some selected individuals, and leaves others predestined for Hell, unable to repent.
The Bible repeatedly states that Jesus came to save all, and calls all to repentance. Repentance is a voluntary act, as is rejecting the Good News of the gospel. Hyper-Calvinism is an exercise in intellectual pride, coupled with excuse-making for failing to win souls to Christ.
I prefer to refer to them as recreational Calvinists. For them, their theology is a game, and winning is the only option, even if it splits or explodes churches to bits.
Matthew 6:15 pretty much refutes calvinism by itself.
2 Peter 3:9 is one of the best refutations.
Just as soon as I master the Trinity I'll explain how God can be sovereign and man can have free will. Like most folks Calvinists sit somewhere on a spectrum of views on the issue. Having read the book Debating Calvinism by Dave Hunt and James White I think White tends towards the Cage-Stage Calvinism and argues that God and God alone is the limiting factor on who enters into Heaven.
I have also heard Steve Brown, another Calvinist, discuss the issue and his view is a little different and makes more sense than most I've heard. He argues that God is totally Sovereign and man has free-will. He says our Aristotelian concept of non-contradiction causes us to says both cannot be true at the same time. I think he is one to something often in the physical universe things take place that are apparent contradictions. If one is unaware of the principles of aerodynamics then it would be a contradiction of the law of gravity to say that heavier than air objects can fly. Yet they do and with greater understanding we can explain why. I think the two concepts appear contradictory, because we are ignorant of something.
Perhaps as eternal beings our actions inside of time our capable of changing circumstances outside of time (or in our thought before time). If there were a way to per se factor time out of the equation is probably would make sense.
In practical application it would be a travesty, dare I say an outright evil, to let any doctrine of election override the great commission. As J Vernon McGee put it: if you could tell the elect by a stripe on their back then you should check before you preach to them; since they don't preach to everybody.
I had two Calvinist coworkers who zeroed in on my being Catholic. It got to be fun; I ask them how Zwingli died (his smashed helmet is in a Swiss museum). They countered that the only true Christian martyrs were those put to death by the pre-Henry VIII Church in England.
Squaring predestination with the evangelizing of others was a little awkward for them. But the zeal of the new convert shown throughout. Churches with sermons less than three hours long weren’t worth attending, they maintained.
I put up a church calendar in my shop that featured classical paintings of the Madonna & Child. Drove them nuts.
I have been reading the book of Romans. Paul writes that God faults man for rejecting Him, for making a conscious effort to reject Him, and God remains open to any who will return.
Thank you for this article. Lots of wisdom there. I wish I had read it about 15-16 years ago. I went through the obnoxious cage stage with my family, but fortunately I kept it in check with friends. It took three years, but eventually my wife, both of my parents, and my brother and sister-in-law all came to accept the Doctrines of Grace, too. After spending their lives actively serving in the Southern Baptist Church it was particularly difficult for my parents. At the time I first confronted them with “Calvinism” they were in their 60’s and well-settled in their beliefs, so I knew it would upset them. And boy was I right about that. But I was also certain they were saved and that they loved the truth.
Understanding the Doctrines of Grace really changed our entire family. Today our teenage children have a boldness to share the gospel in a way I couldn’t until I was in my forties. I could admit I was a Christian, but to my shame I didn’t actively witness to lost friends. My oldest has remarkable strength of character and courage of her convictions. I fully expect her to be a foreign missionary. My parents are now well into their 70’s and they have a renewed vigor to evangelize that has been wonderful example for their grandchildren. As long as their health holds out, they will be on the ground with me and several of their grandchildren in Brazil next year as part of a missionary effort through R.C. Sproul’s Ligonier. I could write an entire book on what understanding grace has done for our family. His grace is truly amazing!
I believe that all that has been created reflects the Creator. Good philosophy follows the truth. However, it seems that most people that engage in arguments for/against Calvinism limit themselves to quoting the Bible.
Here is an interesting article showing how predestination and free will might be reconcilable without violating the non-contradiction principle:
You misunderstand my post. And it wasn’t my intent to engage in debate here, but rather emphasize love for neighbor.
“And God is no respecter of people...”
Sproul and his comrades must be well physically conditioned after having to dance around scriptures like that, and hundreds more. Of course God is sovereign, and He says, over and over, “make your choice.” He gave Adam and Eve the ability to make a choice.
Suppose Calvinism is right and they’ve discovered the secret code of the Bible. Then what is the point of arguing and proselytizing about this secret code you’ve discovered? Just to annoy others?
Secret code?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.