+- SFL Forum (http://www.stufffundieslike.com/forum)
+-- Forum: Deep Discussions (/forumdisplay.php?fid=28)
+--- Forum: General Theology Discussion and Debate (/forumdisplay.php?fid=12)
+--- Thread: New Calvinism (/showthread.php?tid=3848)
Pages: 1 2
New Calvinism - GraceThruFaith - 02-28-2012 08:00 PM
Has anyone else heard of this before? I just came across NC this week, but probably not from a good source: https://paulspassingthoughts.wordpress.com/
Basically, the above site is anti-New Calvinist and views people like John Piper, Tim Keller, and Tullian Tchividjian as we view Jack Hyles and John R Rice.
For me, I am big on Gospel Sanctification, which, according to the above website, is considered heresy. Gospel Sanctification is simply believing that the Gospel is the power behind your sanctification. You can only obey the commands of God through the power of the Gospel. But I guess believing that is heresy....
Additionally, using a Redemptive-Historical hermeneutic is considered eisegetical, and it is impossible to use RHH with a Grammatical-Historical hermeneutic (found that here).
There's a couple more surprising issues - such as holding to New Covenant Theology - that were considered New Calvinist.
I just want to know what other people's thoughts are on this.
RE: New Calvinism - Elijah Craig - 02-28-2012 08:17 PM
New Calvinism is generally identified with guys like Al Mohler, John Piper, Mark Driscoll, Joshua Harris, etc. A little less so with Tim Keller and John Macarthur. Ground Zero is 800 Lexington Road, Louisville, Kentucky, USA.
It is distinguished from "old Calvinism" in that it is focused mainly on the soteriological aspects of Calvinism and is more friendly toward charismatic doctrine. Generally, there is a focus on things like Nouthetic counseling and Complementarianism that is not prominent in older forms of Reformed evangelicalism. Another distinguishing mark is the heavy use of the words "Gospel" and "Biblical", so much so they become catch phrases or marketing terms rather than a meaningful descriptor.
A good number of us here are familiar with it. It's a very common destination for former Independent Baptist Fundamentalists. I'd say the movement peaked around 2007/2008 and in the last year especially a lot of sheen has come off it. The bodies are starting to pile up and a lot of the leaders don't seem much different than IFBers (they just have better PR and marketing). All the cool kids criticize the movement now.
I actually went to seminary-- a prominent one associated with New Calvinism-- and I really never heard New Covenant theology mentioned much until I came here. Looking back, I guess I was exposed to it in the late 90's but there are no widely recognized scholars that adhere to it by that name. Although I noticed just now that someone on Wikipedia tried to tie it to Doug Moo.
RE: New Calvinism - Papa Bear - 02-28-2012 08:25 PM
His text appears blurry, and then comes slowly into focus. Does he post his text as graphics to make it load slower? I got tired of waiting.
RE: New Calvinism - redbeardiam - 02-28-2012 09:00 PM
Wow. That guy looks like a quack. Kudos to you for actually outting up with the site long enough to read some of the content.
EC did a pretty good summary. I'd add that New Calvinism seems to be fragmenting a bit lately.
I think the hyperfocus on the soteriological aspects of Calvinism is one of the larger weaknesses. There's not enough 'there' there to sustain a movement long-term. The streams within NC that survive long-term will be the ones with a robust theology addressing other aspects of faith and life, not just TULIP.
RE: New Calvinism - Elijah Craig - 02-28-2012 09:14 PM
(02-28-2012 09:00 PM)redbeardiam Wrote: EC did a pretty good summary. I'd add that New Calvinism seems to be fragmenting a bit lately.
A helpful addition to my summary. I've been out of New Calvinist circles for a couple years now and mentally I checked out a year ealier than I actually left. My primary exposure to it now is my Facebook wall (old seminary acquaintances). What I'm hearing is that New Calvinism is splintering, and my gut feeling is that's true. The differences were there 3-4 years ago but some of the "scandals" with Driscoll, Mahaney, etc., have served as wedges to drive the cracks wider.
Quote:There's not enough 'there' there to sustain a movement long-term.
Yes. I've not heard it put quite that way but it's very true. There was enough for a fabulous marketing push and to sell a few books. But as they've tried to put down roots and become an establishment, they've fallen on their faces. One exception might be Acts 29 (minus Driscoll).
RE: New Calvinism - Elijah Craig - 02-28-2012 09:29 PM
And might I add, that regardless of what they might say, they are not Together for the Gospel nor are they a Gospel Coalition. If the Gospel were the primary focus then you'd have evangelical feminists there. If the Gospel were the focus they wouldn't have 90 minute work sessions on church discipline and the sovereignty of God but zero work sessions on effective missions or evangelism. They've turned "Gospel" into a marketing slogan.
RE: New Calvinism - redbeardiam - 02-28-2012 10:54 PM
(02-28-2012 09:29 PM)Elijah Craig Wrote: And might I add, that regardless of what they might say, they are not Together for the Gospel nor are they a Gospel Coalition. If the Gospel were the primary focus then you'd have evangelical feminists there. If the Gospel were the focus they wouldn't have 90 minute work sessions on church discipline and the sovereignty of God but zero work sessions on effective missions or evangelism. They've turned "Gospel" into a marketing slogan.
Driscoll has commented that there are "not a lot of conversions" going on reformed circles.
So many of the the T4G/Gospel Coalition guys seem to hold their noses over Acts29 (despite the obvious overlap). But out of the whole crew, the A29 guys are the ones most focused on mission and evangelism... You know, actually spreading the gospel instead of just thinking about it a lot.
The elevation of gender roles to a primary doctrine is wrong.
Acts 29 is helping church planters start new churches at a constantly increasing rate. If they can make the organizational shifts necessary to be effective as they grow, they (I guess I should say we, since I'm part of an A29 church) will be around long term.
RE: New Calvinism - GraceThruFaith - 02-28-2012 11:29 PM
Ok, so things like using a redemptive-historical hermeneutic and believing in Gospel Sanctification are not necessarily New Calvinist?
RE: New Calvinism - Elijah Craig - 02-28-2012 11:35 PM
I don't believe I have ever read or heard the term "Gospel Sanctification" before this thread.
A pastor or scholar employing the redemptive-historical hermeneutic would not trigger anything inside me to cause me to identify someone as New Calvinist.
RE: New Calvinism - captain_solo - 02-29-2012 09:12 AM
I guess I just thought "Gospel Sanctification" was obvious from scripture...I got assaulted for it in fundyland (by a person who was at least a 4 pointer on TULIP) for sure, because it "diminished man's responsibility" or some such hooey. Even when it comes to election, the passages almost all speak about "being conformed to the image of His Son" not just election to justification.
I just responded that by emphasizing the efforts of humans in sanctification above the power of God they were flirting with being Semi-Pelagian or Wesleyan and that usually helped the discussion go even further off the tracks into name calling, and ended it quicker.