Please, Join My Church!

“My church is the best!” “Please, join my church…”

Church members and leaders can sometimes speak and act in ways that sound desperate or even arrogant. We can sometimes give the impression that our church is better than all others, and we can sometimes make it sound like we can’t survive without adding a few more members next week. Neither of these is true, and we ought to resist the temptation to think or to speak or to act either arrogantly or desperately.

Many Evangelical churches in my area of East Texas are comprised of good people, church members who want to see people trust and love Jesus and who want to see their churches grow numerically. But, often, these same church members give little thought to the ways in which their practice of church membership actually works against the spread of the gospel and the spiritual growth of disciples.

When Christians are distinct from non-Christians, then people understand what it means to convert to Christianity. When Christians know the gospel well and articulate it clearly, then the gospel is more accessible and understandable. And when Christians live holy and humbly in meaningful relationship with one another, then Christians spiritually grow.

In an effort to take membership more seriously, and at the risk of saying really basic things about the responsibilities of church membership, let me offer four suggestions to those church members who want to do their part.

First, prioritize church meetings (maybe your church calls these business meetings or members’ meetings).

In a congregational church (which describes most of the churches near me), lots of decisions are made in those meetings, and lots of information is publicized. You’ll be a better informed and more knowledgeable member if you attend these meetings regularly.

The most important decisions made by a church are about membership (who’s in and who’s out) and members’ meetings are usually the time and place to make those decisions. This is one of the basic functions of church membership in a congregational church, and these decisions exercise Christian muscles we need to strengthen in order to grow as Christians.

Make it a priority to be present at church meetings, and pay special attention to the discussion and votes concerning membership.

Second, listen to peoples’ conversion stories.

There aren’t many things I enjoy quite as much as I enjoy hearing someone tell me how they began following Jesus. I love every aspect of a good conversion story. I love to hear the humility of a broken and contrite heart. I love to hear gratitude for others who took the time to plant and water gospel-seed. I love to hear the joy of freedom in Christ, and I love to hear about God’s ongoing transformative work.

Do you want to know how I’m able to hear so many conversion stories? I ask! I say something like, “So, tell me how you first came to believe the gospel and follow Jesus…”

Don’t just ask if someone is a Christian… Ask them to tell you about how they were converted. And then listen! Listen for sorrow and grief over sin. Listen for gratitude and gospel investments. Listen for joy in Christ above all else, and listen for continued life-transformation as they’ve followed Christ ongoingly.

Let’s never get tired of hearing conversion stories, and let’s never grow weary of telling our own.

Third, expect slow growth.

Taking church membership seriously means (among other things) taking members in slowly. There’s no rush, and we’re more interested in getting to know and love a new person than we are in just making them a statistic.

If you are a church member, you should expect your elders or pastors to take time in getting to know those who want to join your church, and you should expect to make an effort yourself. This kind of intentional effort inevitably leads to slower growth of membership numbers, but churches who take membership seriously will often grow more steadily.

Take time to genuinely get to know and love others, and wait to see how God might slowly and steadily grow your church.

Fourth, love the church family God gives you.

At the end of the day, we all have to decide to be part of a church family, but God is the one who ultimately brings us together. God has put us right where He wants us, and He has done so for our good and for His glory.

We should treasure the fact that there are other Christians in the world who have decided to take responsibility for the care of our souls. Your fellow church members, and those church members God will add in the future, are God’s gifts to you. And God intends you to be a loving gift to them as well.

Look for ways you can show love for your fellow church members by serving them and helping them follow Jesus.

These four suggestions aren’t going to make your church grow fast, and they aren’t going to win any awards for creativity or innovation. But applying these four suggestions will indeed make you a better church member, they will help your church to be healthier, and they will probably make you more content with God’s provision… rather than stressed about how in the world you can get more people to “please, join my church!”

Marc Minter is the senior pastor of First Baptist Church of Diana, TX. He and his wife, Cassie, have two sons, Micah and Malachi.

Connect with Marc on Twitter or Facebook.

What’s the difference between “Pastors” and “Elders”?

Elders are qualified, recognized, and committed men who do the work of shepherding among a particular local church (Ephesians 4:11-16; 1 Timothy 3:1-7; Titus 1:6-9).

The Short Answer

There’s no biblical difference between pastors and elders. The two terms refer to one and the same New Testament church office.

Anyone who aims to parse out some distinction between pastors and elders is creating a modern invention and placing it on top of the biblical text. There may certainly be good reasons why a local church would use different titles for various church leaders, but the only case for doing so is a pragmatic or prudent one… not a biblical one.

Now, I hope you’ll read the remainder of this article in order to weigh the merit of my rationale for making such a claim.

Defining Our Terms

In the New Testament, the most common title or label for the leading, teaching, and shepherding office of the church is “elder” (πρεσβυτερος), appearing directly at least thirteen times in the New Testament. The word “overseer” (επισκοπος) is the second most common title for the office, and it shows up at least six times.

The label “shepherd” or “pastor” (ποιμην) is used only once as a label for the New Testament teaching and leading office of the local church. Most often (fifteen times), this word appears in the Gospels, and it refers to actual shepherds (tenders of sheep) or to Jesus as the metaphorical shepherd of His people.

Almost every time the label “shepherd” or “pastor” is used in the other New Testament books (besides the Gospels), it shows up in its verbal form (ποιμαινω). In other words, in the Bible, “shepherd” or “pastor” is usually what church leaders do… it’s not what church leaders are.

However, many Evangelicals today are familiar with the term “pastor” as a label for church leaders, because this word has been used by Protestants for hundreds of years. Baptists have been especially fond of the word “pastor” because it distinguishes Baptist church leaders from those of Presbyterian or Anglican churches.

Baptist churches have also often emphasized their understanding of the doctrine of the priesthood of the believer. Because all Christians are in some sense “priests” (1 Peter 2:9), Baptists refuse to acknowledge a special clergy or ministerial class of Christians.

And yet, despite the Baptist allergy to a professionalized pastoral ministry, it is quite common for Evangelicals (including Baptists) to act as though pastors are indeed separated Christian professionals. For example, most Evangelical churches in America have no unpaid pastors. Such a reality betrays the assumption that pastors are professional (or at the very least vocational) Christian teachers and leaders.

Since the Bible most often uses the term “elder” and since many wrongly assume pastors must be paid professionals, I believe it is probably helpful for Evangelicals (especially Baptists) to recover the use of the term “elder” for the pastoral office.

Describing the Officers

The two offices of the New Testament are elders and deacons. The former is an office of servant-leadership and loving instruction, and the latter is an office of selfless service. In the Bible, church leaders are always elders, and deacons always serve both the elders and the church body.

In short, elders are qualified, recognized, and committed men who do the work of shepherding among a particular local church (Ephesians 4:11-16; 1 Timothy 3:1-7; Titus 1:6-9).

Here are the various ways in which the Bible describes and/or prescribes the function and responsibilities of those who serve in the office of elder.

Elders (πρεσβυτερος) 
  • Acts 11:30 – Elders (πρεσβυτερους) received material gifts from other churches in order to distribute them to the needy among their own congregation.
  • Acts 14:23 – Multiple elders (πρεσβυτερους) were “appointed” by Paul and Barnabas in “every church” in Lystra, Iconium, and Antioch.
  • Acts 15:1-29 – Elders (πρεσβυτερους) are listed beside the Apostles as leaders of the church in Jerusalem.
  • Acts 16:4 – Elders (πρεσβυτερων) are listed beside the Apostles as having made an authoritative decision regarding the clarity and extent of the gospel.
  • Acts 20:17-38 – Paul addressed the elders (πρεσβυτερους) in Ephesus, calling them to “overseers” (’επισκοπους) of God’s “church” (’εκκλησιαν).
  • Acts 21:17-26 – “All the elders” (πρεσβυτεροι) were gathered in Jerusalem to listen to Paul’s account of God’s work through his ministry, and Paul submitted to their counsel regarding his actions in their Jewish community.
  • 1 Timothy 4:14 – A “council of elders” (πρεσβυτεριου) commissioned Timothy for the task of ministry.
  • 1 Timothy 5:17 – Elders (πρεσβυτεροι) are those who “rule” or “manage” (προεστωτες [literally ‘stand over’]), and some elders make their living by “preaching and teaching” (λογω [literally ‘word’] and διδασκαλια).
  • 1 Timothy 5:19 – Christians are to be alert to the possibility of slanderous accusations against an elder (πρεσβυτερου).
  • Titus 1:5-6 – Elders (πρεσβυτερους) were appointed to churches in every town, and such appointments were necessary to put things in their appropriate order.
  • James 5:14 – The elders (πρεσβυτερους) of the church (’εκκλησιας) are to pray for ill church members.
  • 1 Peter 5:1-3 – The Apostle Peter wrote to the elders (πρεσβυτερους) among the dispersed Christians as a “fellow elder” (συμπρεσβυτερος), calling them to “exercise oversight” or “oversee” (’επισκοπουντες) the affairs of their respective congregations.
Overseer (’επισκοπος) 
  • Acts 20:17-38 – Paul says that the elders in Ephesus have been made “overseers” (’επισκοπους) in the “church” (’εκκλησιαν) by God Himself.
  • Philippians 1:1 – Paul addressed his letter to the “saints” (‘αγιοις) and the “overseers” (’επισκοποις) and the “deacons” (διακονοις) in Philippi.
  • 1 Timothy 3:1 – Paul labels the teaching and managing office in the church that of an “overseer” (’επισκοπης).
  • 1 Timothy 3:2-7 – Paul describes the qualifications for anyone who aspires to the office of “overseer” (’επισκοπον).
  • Titus 1:17 – Paul again describes the teaching and stewarding office in the church as that of an “overseer” (’επισκοπον).
Pastor (ποιμην) 
  • Ephesians 4:10-14 – Paul says that “shepherds” (ποιμενας) are gifts from Christ to the local church.
  • 1 Peter 5:1-3 – Peter exhorted “elders” (πρεσβυτερους) to “shepherd” (ποιμενατε) the “flock of God among them.”

If one were to simply read the New Testament, without observing the use of various terms among modern Evangelicals, he or she would inevitably conclude that the leading and teaching and shepherding office of a New Testament local church is that of elder. Furthermore, he or she would also conclude that the office must be occupied by faithful and exemplary men, who would voluntarily take on the weighty task of caring for souls among a particular local church.

Marc Minter is the senior pastor of First Baptist Church of Diana, TX. He and his wife, Cassie, have two sons, Micah and Malachi.

Connect with Marc on Twitter or Facebook.

The Psalms of the Day

Have you ever read the Psalms of the day?

The Bible helps us to express our emotions and focus our prayer, and this is especially true of the Psalms. What does godly sorrow sound like? How should we pray for those who are overtly attacking us? Where can we find genuine words of contrition and repentance? All of this, and much more, is in the Psalms.

I highly recommend reading the Psalms of the day. This method of daily Bible reading can be especially helpful if you are going through a tough time, if you are struggling to pray meaningfully, or if you want to grow in your love for God and your awareness of His presence and provision.

You might be thinking, “Alright, I’d like to do this, but what in the world are the Psalms of the day?” Let me offer a brief explanation.

There are 150 Psalms. Divide that by 5, and you get 30.

There are usually 30-31 days each month (Feb is the exception). So, you start by reading the Psalm number that corresponds to today’s date. The date of this post is 10/01/2019, so you would begin with Psalm 1.

Then you add 30 to the day’s date and read that Psalm. Then you add another 30, and so on until you run out of Psalms.

On the first day of the month, the readings are Psalms 1, 31, 61, 91, and 121.

On the second day, the readings are Psalms 2, 32, 62, 92, and 122.

You get the idea.

This method of reading the Psalms would have you through the whole book of Psalms in a single month. I’ve found this method a great way to lead family Bible readings, and the Psalms are a marvelous place to turn for personal devotions as well.

May God bless your reading of His word, and may your hope in Him grow deeper and stronger with every reading.

A note about Psalm 119:

Since Psalm 119 is quite lengthy (you can read it in about 10-20 minutes), you could read Psalm 119 alone on the 31st of those months with 31 days.

Or you might notice that Psalm 119 is broken down into 22 sections (one section for each letter of the Hebrew alphabet), and you could devise some other method for reading through Psalm 119 along with your other daily readings. For example, you might read one section on each weekday of the month along with the other Psalms of the day.

Marc Minter is the senior pastor of First Baptist Church of Diana, TX. He and his wife, Cassie, have two sons, Micah and Malachi.

Connect with Marc on Twitter or Facebook.

“Word-Centered Church” by Jonathan Leeman

The following is a sort of mixture, both a book review and a personal commentary on some particular applications of the book’s substance.             

In his book, Word-Centered Church, Jonathan Leeman argues for a church theology and practice inundated by Scripture… in other words, a Word-centeredor Scripture-centeredchurch. Leeman writes, “[A Word-centered church] is a church where the words and teachings of Scripture reverberate back and forth, from mouth to mouth and heart to heart” (93).

So, he is not merely calling pastors to preach the Bible, he is calling all the members of a local church to participate holistically in the reverberating word-centeredness of their particular body. In this book, Leeman contends for what he calls a “faith proposition.” He says, “trusting God’s Word to build our churches is an act of faith” (29).

And yet, as any contender should, Leeman notes that many church leaders and members today are not seeking to build Word-centered churches. Numerous evangelical leaders and parishioners (Maybe the vast majority?) are seeking to build their churches by catering to a particular demographic.

In my own Baptist association in East Texas there are several “cowboy churches” and even a “biker church”! I have often wondered why some pastors haven’t stopped hiding the fact that they are seeking to build “affluent churches” or “white-urban-professional churches” or “hipster churches.” If we are targeting these demographics, why pretend we are doing something innovative or clever?

I have personally (to my shame) been a part of a collaborative effort in local church ministry to target a certain demographic on many occasions. As a matter of fact, the evangelistic parachurch ministry I once helped lead was largely built on the supposition that non-Christians needed to be drawn to church services by something other than the Scriptures and the gospel.

In addition to this parachurch experience, I was also one of four pastors on staff at a Southern Baptist church in North Texas who openly employed the Rick Warren model of targeting Saddleback Sam. This is a way of building local church practices, buildings, ambiance, and programs that would suit the tastes of a majority demographic geographically near the local church building. Leeman admits, “in the short term, this will build churches. Demographic and cultural loyalty is genuinely, empirically, demonstrably powerful” (73). I’ve heard this phrased many times as the argument by church leaders advocating for such practices.

 But Leeman is interested in more than just pragmatic strategies, and he effectively brings the reader into the place where the important question can be asked. Leeman sets the scene, inviting the reader to envision himself/herself visiting a church for the first time. He helps picture the imaginary venture, bringing the reader right to a seat in the auditorium, immediately before the start of the service.

Then Leeman asks, “What’s most important to you as you consider whether you will come back to this church?” (84). Every Christian – especially church leaders – must ask this question.

What is the most important thing about a local church?

Borrowing language from the Reformers and the Puritans, the two marks of a true churchare (1) the right preaching of God’s word and (2) the right administration of the sacraments or ordinances. Therefore, the most important thing about a local church – if it seeks to be a true church– is that it faithfully preaches God’s word. God’s word must be preached, taught, explained, believed, and treasured. This is not merely referring to the Sunday sermon, but to the whole life and ministry of the entire congregation. Still, the centrality of Scripture among a congregation certainly starts with the preaching.

In what follows, I will focus on the role of expositional preaching in the local church. I will first observe the divine authority of expositional preaching, then the expected response to expositional preaching. In each of these areas, I will point out the distinctiveness of expositional preaching from other forms of preaching I have experienced and the effects I have seen of expositional preaching under my own pastoral efforts.

Divine Authority

Expositional preaching happens when the main point of the Scriptural text is the main point of the sermon. An expositional sermon helps the hearer understand the Bible better and apply biblical truth to his/her life. In this way, expositional preaching is driven by God’s word, causing some to understand that the preacher is (in effect) speaking on God’s behalf, even as he speaks with his own words on a Sunday.

Leeman asks an important question when he writes, “How can ‘our words’ be ‘His Word’?” Indeed! How can a preacher – especially a cessationist preacher who believes in the sufficiency of Scripture – think that he is preaching “a word from God” as he preaches with his own words from his own mouth? 

I think the answer Leeman gives is helpful. He says, “God speaks through us whenever we plainly and modestly relate whatever He has already said in the Bible” (100). Thus, the preacher engages in something Leeman calls “re-revelation” (Leeman attributed this jargon to D.A. Carson) when he reads and explains God’s singular special revelation (i.e. Scripture). And this is the only grounds for any preacher to claim divine authority when he speaks.

I have noted a bizarre dichotomy of feelings in my own heart as I stand to preach behind a pulpit each Sunday. On the one hand, I am terrified. I am fearful of God’s judgment against my own sin and shortcomings. Who am I to stand before God this day and speak on His behalf?! I am fearful of the people’s judgment against my lack of knowledge and skill. Who am I to speak commandingly to so many people, some far more knowledgeable and skilled than I am?!

On the other hand, I am overwhelmingly confident. I am confident in God’s trustworthiness, His wisdom, His justice, and His grace. I am confident of the people’s need for God’s truth, their need to understand it, to believe it, to submit it, and to be nourished by it. The reason for this dichotomy is that I feel the weight of my own ineptitude and the weight of God’s own majesty. As a preacher, I can speak with divine authority when (and only when) I faithfully read, explain, and apply God’s holy word.

Therefore, expositional preaching plays the role of giving divinely authoritative direction to a particular local church. Who are we? What shall we do? How shall we live? All of these questions are answered on the pages of Scripture, and it is the job of the preacher to expound the Scripture in the context of a particular church family so that they may be hearers and doers of God’s word.

A Right Response

Because expositional preaching is the kind of preaching that best displays divinely authoritative preaching, it is also the best kind of preaching for leading the hearer toward a biblical response. Preaching is not essentially guidelines for living, steps for improving, or suggestions for success. Preaching (when it is faithfully expositional) is a divine word from God that must be believed and heeded. Leeman notes that “the Bible does two things: It announces what God has done, and it confronts its hearers with this news and its implications” (110).

Expositional preaching, then, announces the indicatives and imperatives of God’s word and confronts the hearer in his/her error. The assumption here is that the hearer is in error, and Leeman addresses that in the book as well. But, for the sake of space, I want to focus on the response that expositional preaching expects from the hearer. It expects divine transformation.

Among my congregation in rural East Texas there may be a number of Christians who are struggling to hear expositional preaching. Their palates have been trained to lap up nutrient-sparse messages of moralism and self-improvement. Many churches within a 20-mile radius of our church building continue striving to package a better therapeutic or culturally-traditional model of doing church.

Because this is true, expositional preaching has been somewhat off-putting to some church members and many visitors. They do not like the emphasis upon propositional statements over motivational ones. They sometimes wonder why there isn’t the same stress upon southern and rural American values, and they chafe at some words of admonition against cultural conformity.

Some, however, have begun to see that it is life-transformation we are after. Some exhibit the fruit of the Spirit’s work in their lives through the reverberation of the Scriptures. Some have joyfully embraced the higher goal of transformation, leaving behind the worldly goal of self-affirming spiritual guidance.

I think of Steve, who read between the lines of my gentle admonition, now looking for ways to read Scripture together with his adult daughters who are grown and gone, all three seeming to be nominal Christians. I think of Kathy, who started reading Scripture together with her mother and three sisters one night each week. Kathy heard her mother pray for the first time about a year ago, and we baptized Wanda (Kathy’s 80-yr-old mom) into membership in 2018.

I think of David, who became a deacon about 2 years ago and joined a weekly study of systematic theology in order to understand the Bible better. I think of Donald, who seems like a 70-yr-old “cage-stage” Reformed guy because he has just begun to grasp what it means that God is truly sovereign and that sound doctrine is life-giving.

Conclusion

God’s word alone has the power to transform lives. In the local church, the role of expositional preaching is to unleash the beast of God’s word without any of the trappings we might try to place upon it in our effort to dress it up a bit or make it more desirable for our modern culture. Christ is King! His word of grace saves! And His Spirit works through His word to transform all those who love and trust Him.

May God raise up many more preachers who humbly believe the “faith proposition” Leeman calls for in this book, and may God glorify Himself through the ministry of many Word-centeredchurches.

Are Baptist Pastors Licensed or Ordained?

The answer is… kind of, but probably not how you think they are.

In the western world, pastors have historically been identified with other clergymen (such as priests, bishops, and the like). Clergy comes from an old word (cleric), and simply refers to someone who is commissioned for Christian ministry. The commissioning of a person to Christian ministry takes on different forms among various ecclesiastical traditions; and different ecclesiastical traditions spring from varying perspectives of polity and ministry.

Presbyterians, Methodists, and Baptists are part of distinct denominations among Christianity, but the first two are not merely named groups of cooperating local churches. The Presbyterian Church of America and the United Methodist Church, both claim to be one “church” with many local congregations (the same is true of the Lutheran Church, the Episcopal Church, and the Anglican Church).

Baptist churches, on the other hand, voluntarily cooperate with other Baptist churches without any substantive oversight from outside entities. Presbyterians and Methodists (as well as Anglicans and Episcopalians) license or ordain people to ministry, according to denomination-wide standards of education, experience, and doctrinal adherence. 

A person licensed as a Presbyterian or Methodist minister may carry such a license with them from one local congregation to another, because their ministerial authority comes from a denominational entity which transcends any particular church. Likewise, the denominational entity may also revoke a minister’s license, with or without the consent of any local church to which the minister might be giving service. This polity creates a kind of ordained or licensed hierarchy of ministers within the denominational structure.

Baptists have historically distinguished themselves among Protestants by practicing congregational polity, rather than presbyterian or episcopalian polity. Congregational polity holds that each local church or congregation is autonomous– self-governed – and not under the authority of any outside body. For Baptists, Christ rules each local church by His word (the Scriptures), and each body of members is responsible to collectively submit to Christ as well as exercise His authority among themselves.

While Baptists are doggedly congregational, they also understand that Christ gives pastors as gifts to lead and to care for each local church (Eph. 4:11-16; Acts 20:28; 1 Peter 5:1-4). The biblical office is that of “elder” (from presbyteros– Titus 1:5) or “overseer” or “bishop” (from episkopos– 1 Tim. 3:1), but Baptists have historically used the term “pastor” (from poimēn– Eph. 4:11).

Since each Baptist church is autonomous, the collective members must affirm their own pastors, rather than have them assigned or appointed by some other authority. Baptist church members choose men of exemplary character (1 Tim. 3:1-7; Titus 1:6-9) who are able to teach sound doctrine (Titus 1:9) and lead as model Christians (1 Tim. 4:6-16).

In some way, the members are ultimately responsible for the kind of men they affirm and the sort of teaching they support (Gal. 1:6-9; 1 Tim. 4:1-2; 3 Tim. 4:3-4), so Baptist churches have historically exercised the authority of the members by a formal vote (based on Acts 6:5 and 2 Cor. 2:6). 

For Baptists, local church autonomy does not mean that each church must isolate itself from others. Rather, Baptist churches have historically been very happy to voluntarily cooperate with one another. Baptist churches have often benefitted from the recommendations and wisdom from other Christian churches. 

One example of this kind of cooperation and benefit is observed in the common way Baptist churches today hire a new pastor. Baptist church members often invite applicants who have already been affirmed by another Christian church as qualified to serve as a pastor. In other words, they look for men who are already ordained to minister elsewhere.

It is precisely at this point that many Baptists today can be confused about what it means for someone to be ordained.

Because Baptist churches are autonomous, and because each congregation is responsible for affirming and supporting its own pastors, ordination is not (biblically speaking) something that be conferred upon a man by anyone other than the congregation he is currently serving as a pastor. But, because of the common practice among churches, Baptists have become much like their Presbyterian and Methodist brothers and sisters in the way they think about ordination. 

Baptist pastors and churches often act as though ordination to ministry is a rite of passage, placing the ordained man into a new category among all Christians everywhere (or at least among all others in their denomination). This simply is not true. It isn’t biblical, and it isn’t historically recognizable as Baptist ecclesiology or polity.

If a man has served as a pastor (or elder) in one congregation, then he may well be later recognized as a pastor (or elder) among another church. However, the office does not travel with the man. Each local church must ultimately affirm or reject any nominated man as a pastor (or elder).

So, are Baptist pastors licensed or ordained? 

Well, Baptist churches (each exercising judgment and authority as a unique gathered congregation) in line with their biblical and historical practice set men aside for pastoral ministry by affirming their character and ability to teach and lead (2 Tim. 2:2; Titus 2:1-10). In this way, the local church formally recognizes God’s own gifting of these men as shepherds, who are to lead by godly example the people God has placed under their care (Acts 20:28; 1 Peter 5:1-4).

Personally, I can say that it has been one of my great joys in life to be affirmed as a pastor by those people who know and love me. I know and love them, and their tangible affirmation of God’s call upon my life to serve them is a priceless treasure.

Marc Minter is the senior pastor of First Baptist Church of Diana, TX. He and his wife, Cassie, have two sons, Micah and Malachi.

Connect with Marc on Twitter or Facebook.

Review: The Purpose Driven Life

In his book The Purpose Driven Life, Rick Warren has offered readers an easy-to-read volume of unreserved encouragement. Line after line seems designed for simplicity, inspiration, and warmth. Even the font and length of the book seem to be aimed at heartening the reader. The print was large and the pages many, meant to give the reader a sense of covering a lot of ground in just over a month. Warren obviously intended this book to be a pleasant and welcoming introduction to the purposefulChristian life.

Christians are likely to enjoy many features of this book – even theologically-minded and carefully-reading kinds of Christians. In fact, many people have read and celebrated The Purpose Driven Life, so I want to spend a little time highlighting some of the probable reasons it has been so highly acclaimed. However, there are also significant disappointments in this devotional book. Therefore, I’d like to ultimately present a couple of reasons why Christians should look elsewhere for quality Christian living material.[1]

The Book Tastes Good 

Warren began his book with the abrasive statement, “It’s not about you” (17). Such a statement is surely a good one for people to read and to think about. It is objectively true (and even intuitively true), but we do not naturally live as though we believe it is. American Evangelicals seem especially interested in accommodating self-centeredness within the Christian worldview. Because of this obvious dichotomy – either life is ultimately about me or God, it cannot be centered on both – Warren’s opening words are probably a little stinging and then undoubtedly quite refreshing for many Christian readers. And Christians are right to be glad that life is really and ultimately about God.

In line with this kind of thinking, Warren pressed his readers to “begin with God” and to discover “[God’s] purpose” for their lives (17). Warren also tried to help the reader understand that “God’s purpose took into account human error, and even sin.” Assuring the reader, Warren wrote, “God never does anything accidentally, and he never makes mistakes” (23). Again, the Christian reader is likely to enjoy and even benefit from such words. Christians know that God is the starting point (Gen. 1:1), and they also know that God’s purposes stand behind all things, even bad and sinful things (Ps. 135:5-12). Warren’s words here are likely welcomed truths for many Christian readers who may benefit from the reminder that God is always at work in our lives, even during hard and bitter times.

Throughout the book, Warren repeatedly wrote of the need to believe in Jesus, to obey Him as Lord, and to demonstrate love for God by acting on love for others. Christian readers are probably happy to see such calls to know and follow Jesus in meaningful ways. I know I appreciated these calls as I read the book. Warren also wrote about the importance of Christian fellowship, the value of genuine community, and the intentional effort needed to participate in a local church. Being a pastor, I thought Warren’s statements were often full of good admonishing words, useful for some of my own church members.

It was easy to see why many Christians find The Purpose Driven Lifeto be a great resource for their own spiritual growth and development. As a matter of fact, just as I was finishing the book, I met a Christian young man who said that this book was the most impactful book he’d read on Christians living. And yet, there were also some very troubling and disappointing features of Warren’s book. Let me mention a couple of the biggest reasons I think this book is actually quite bad.

But the Book is Poisonous

There are more than a few reasons to place this book in the category of “bad books.” I don’t mean it should never be read, and I’m no book-burning fanatic, but I want to sound a word of warning to those who might be interested in thinking sensibly about this book. We should be level-headed about all that we read, and this book is no exception. As a matter of fact, I have some readers especially in mind as I write these words of warning. I imagine young and immature Christians reading this book, not realizing the juice is mixed with cyanide. Worse yet, I imagine non-Christians reading this book, not realizing they’re being inoculated against the gospel of Jesus Christ, their only hope in life and death.

Let me outline two overwhelmingly bad features of The Purpose Driven Life. I hope you’ll consider my warning and then spend a little time thinking about the validity of such arguments. I also hope that you’ll consider the state of your own soul, and that you’ll give effort to knowing the gospel and the God who saves. Warren’s book is bad, first, because the gospel is absent. Second, Warren assumes his reader is a Christian from the beginning. These two combined qualities make this book awfully poisonous. Ingesting either one is dangerous, but the combination is eternally lethal. Let me explain.

Nonexistent gospel. Not every book should be expected to include the gospel of Jesus Christ. I want to be clear on this point. But any book on Christian living, especially one that targets non-Christians, and even more particularly one that aims to define the “Good News” of Christianity, should absolutely include the substance of the Christian gospel. The gospel is the “Good News” after all. The gospel is the message of God’s plan to save sinners through the person and work of Jesus Christ.[2]

On day three of his forty-day devotional, Warren finished his brief chapter by telling the reader that God will one day “do an audit of your life, a final exam, before you enter eternity” (34). It was at this point that Warren seemed to begin his appeal for the reader to become a Christian. He wrote, “From the Bible we can surmise that God will ask us two crucial questions: First, ‘What did you do with my Son, Jesus Christ?’ …Second, ‘What did you do with what I gave you?’” Warren went on to say, “The first question will determine where you spend eternity. The second question will determine what you do in eternity.” It was later, on day seven, when Warren seemed to urge his reader toward an evangelical response to the gospel. 

Employing his language of the purposeful life, Warren wrote, “Real life begins by committing yourself completely to Jesus Christ. If you are not sure you have done this, all you need to do is receiveand believe” (58). Warren explained belief by writing, “Believe God loves you and made you for his purposes… Believe God has chosen you to have a relationship with Jesus, who died on the cross for you.” Then Warren went on to describe the meaning of “receive” by saying, “Receive Jesus into your life as you Lord and Savior. Receive his forgiveness… [and] his Spirit, who will give you the power to fulfill your life purpose.” Then Warren invited the reader to “bow your head and quietly whisper the prayer that will change your eternity.” And then he recommended a brief, innocuous prayer.

Later still, on day thirty-seven, Warren finally sought to define the “Good News” of the gospel. Urging his reader to share the gospel with others, Warren spent a couple of lines explaining the substance of the gospel message. He wrote, “The Good News is that when we trust God’s grace to save us through what Jesus did, our sins are forgiven, we get a purpose for living, and we are promised a future home in heaven” (294). That’s it… No explanation of sin, no clarification about who Jesus is at all, and no description of what Jesus did. Obviously, a Christian could expound on this anemic content and make the gospel clear. But throughout the full content of Warren’s book, these several lines are the whole of his supposedly gospel substance, and this is simply a non-gospel. 

Who is God? What is sin? Who is Jesus? Why did Christ die? For whom did Christ die? What does Christ’s death have to do with the reader? How is Christ’s work applied to the sinner? What relationship does God’s saving work have with my effort to live for Him? These are the crucial questions of the Christian life, and Warren answers none of them. He gives no substance to a message he calls “the Good News,” and this is poisonous to the non-Christian reader. He or she may think the gospel is a vacuous message, and he or she may even think the gospel has been received and applied by reading this book. He or she may believe that heaven is assured, simply because he or she has read this book. But this would be an eternally costly presumption. A gospel message with no substance is poison to those who receive it. 

Christianity assumed. A hollow gospel is bad enough, but Warren did not leave the reader to his or her own thoughts about the state of his or her soul. Warren offered complete and unreserved assurance to his reader, and this even before his hollow gospel was presented. Warren wrote his book as though every reader is objectively on their way to paradise and glory.

Ten pages and one day before Warren asked his reader “What did you do with Jesus Christ?” and five days before Warren lead his reader to “believe” and “receive” the blessings of salvation (without defining or explaining the gospel at all), Warren assured his reader of God’s special love. He wrote, “You were created as a special object of God’s love! God made you so he could love you” (24). 

The Bible is clear that God’s does love the world (Jn. 3:16), and God even loves sinners (Rom. 5:8), but God’s special love is only for those He saves in Christ (Eph. 1:4-6, 2:4-10; 1 Jn. 4:10). To say that everyone on the planet (at least every one of those who will read Warren’s book) is a “special object of God’s love” is to declare a universal application of God’s special love. How, then, is the reader to understand this assured promise? Is this not a promised assurance of God’s saving love?

Warren’s book is filled with this same kind of presumptuous assurance, giving the reader every reason to believe he or she is perfectly right before God and on his or her way to eternal blessings rather than cursing. Warren wrote, “God wants a family, and he created you to be a part of it” (117). Soon after, he wrote, “The moment you were spiritually born into God’s family, you were given some astounding birthday gifts: the family name, the family likeness, family privileges, family intimate access, and the family inheritance” (119). On what basis does Warren make such family promises? On the basis that the reader is simply reading his book, I suppose?

Warren made his presumption explicit when gave an unequivocal assurance of salvation immediately after his nebulous non-gospel presentation on day seven. After urging his reader to pray an innocuous prayer, he wrote, “If you sincerely meant that prayer, congratulations! Welcome to the family of God!” (59). Warren bypassed the affirmation of the local church, supplanted any critical assessment of genuine conversion, and simply assured and congratulated his reader.

Far and away, the worst poison in this book is Warren’s intention that his reader to think that he or she has read, understood, and embraced the gospel. He intends his reader to embrace every promise God has made to those who are in Christ, without the substance of the gospel and without the benefit of critically thinking through whether or not the reader has actually understood and embraced the message of Christ.For these two reasons, I caution the reader. This book is poisonous. It could be quite lethal to the soul.


[1]For the interested reader, I suggest the following resources as superior Christian living and devotional materials. A Little Book on the Christian Lifeby John Calvin, Mornings and Eveningsby Charles Spurgeon, Thoughts for Young Menby J.C. Ryle, and Spiritual Disciplines for the Christian Lifeby Donald Whitney.

[2]Lest I be accused of doing the same thing I am accusing Warren of, allow me to briefly layout the essence of the gospel message. God is the creator, holy and just. One day He will distribute perfect justice on all creation. Man was created in the image of God, the apex of God’s creation, but man rebelled against (sinned) God’s good authority. Humanity became God’s enemy, and people continue in rebellion by continually sinning against God in their thought and words and deeds. Despite God’s right to judge everyone for their rebellion, God showed love for sinners by sending Jesus – the Son of God who became a human – to live perfectly under God’s law and to die as the substitute for all who would trust and love Him. Through Jesus, God reconciled guilty sinners with Himself, no longer counting them as guilty but counting them as adopted and beloved children. To this glorious news, God calls everyone everywhere to repent (turn from sin and disbelief) and believe (trust and love and submit to) Jesus Christ. This is, in brief, the gospel. The whole Christian life is lived out by understanding this message more deeply and applying it more broadly and thoroughly to every area of life, normally in community with other believers (i.e. the local church) who are doing the same.

A Perspective on the Historical Development of “Calvinism”

There is much to be said about Calvinism among American Evangelicals today. In my own denomination, the Southern Baptist Convention, there has been no small amount of concern about the recent resurgence of Calvinistic theology and people claiming to be Calvinists.

In this brief essay, I merely want to offer a fast-paced perspective of how some of the foundational doctrines of Calvinism developed and were articulated throughout church history. This is obviously not an exhaustive report or historical volume. I simply want to offer the average reader an opportunity to gain an introductory perspective of how we arrived here in American Evangelicalism.

John Calvin did not invent “Calvinism”

The five doctrines, known as the “Five Points of Calvinism,” or “TULIP,” or “the Doctrines of Grace,” were not articulated as “five points” until sometime in the 1800s. John Calvin was born in 1509 and he died in 1564. As a matter of fact, the doctrines in focus in the “Five Points of Calvinism” were only collected in a group when students of a Dutch theologian, named Jacobus Arminius, protested these doctrines in a town called Dort, in the Netherlands (1618-19). Arminius was born in 1560, so he was 4 years old when Calvin died, and his students never met Calvin at all.

I will say more about the “Five Points of Calvinism” in a bit, and I will even give a brief overview of the acrostic “TULIP,” but before I do, let me show you that these doctrines were already in focus way back in the early church. In fact, the “T” in TULIP (standing for Total Depravity) can at least be traced back to a theological debate among churchmen in the fourth-century.

Augustine vs. Pelagius on Total Depravity[1]

Late in the fourth-century (like 398-99 AD), a North-African bishop by the name of Augustine wrote the longest prayer known to man. It was a 300+ page autobiography, emphasizing his own conversion to Christ from paganism, which was entirely written as a prayer. It was a best-selling book at that time, and you can still find it in print today because Christians have recognized Augustine’s tremendous biblical insight and humble honesty.

In this book, Augustine wrote,

My whole hope is in Your exceedingly great mercy and that alone. You command self-control from us, but I am sure that no one can have self-control unless You give it to him. Grant what You command and command what You will (or in some translations: whatever pleases You).”

Essentially, Augustine was claiming that fallen humans (i.e. sinful humans after Genesis 3) cannot do anything genuinely good unless or until God enables them to do so. This claim is basic to the doctrine known as “Total Depravity.”

Total Depravitydoes not mean that fallen humans are as bad as they could be… as though a sinner could not possibly be any worse than he or she already is. We all know that we could be much worse than we are right now. Instead, Total Depravityis the doctrinal understanding that fallen humans are affected by sin in such a way so that no part of the person is left untouched by sin (our body, our minds, and our will or desires).

Augustine’s view of fallen humanity was built upon biblical descriptions of the sinful corruption of fallen humans.

For example, Romans 3:10-12says, “None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God. All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one.”

Or Ephesians 2:1-3speaks of the deadness of man’s soul and the corruption of his desires. The Apostle Paul wrote to Christians, saying, “you were [once] dead in the trespasses and sins in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience – among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind.”

Pelagius, an ascetic monk and theologian who lived during the same time period as Augustine, read Augustine’s book and didn’t like that particular part of Augustine’s prayer.

Pelagius said, “How can God hold humans responsible for not doing what they cannot do? Man is either utterly free to obey the commands of God, or God’s commands are unjust… God is unjust.”

Pelagius argued that even fallen humans must be able to obey God’s commands without God’s help (i.e. without God’s gracious and active intervention). Whatever sinful corruption humans suffer after the fall of Adam, Pelagius argued, these effects have not taken away man’s ability to do genuine good and obey God’s commands.

Unlike Augustine, Pelagius does not have any surviving works today, so historians don’t know very much about him. His students were the ones who picked up his cause against Augustine’s doctrines of man’s depravity and God’s sovereignty, and the doctrinal dispute came to a head at the Council of Ephesusin 431 AD. That gathering of Christian pastors and theologians declared Pelagianism an officialheresy– a doctrine that is outside of the umbrella of Christianity (an unbiblical teaching of a First-Level doctrine).

On a side note: Southern Baptists have historically agreed with Augustine and the Council of Ephesus on this matter. The Baptist Faith and Message states, “Through the temptation of Satan man transgressed the command of God, and fell from his original innocence whereby his posterity inherit a nature and an environment inclined toward sin.” Therefore, anyone who disagrees with Augustine or John Calvin on the nature of fallen humans must also admit that they disagree with Southern Baptists.

Though Pelagianism was outed as an official heresy in 431 AD, a similar doctrinal teaching emerged among Christians only about 100 years later (called Semi-Pelagianism). In this modified view, Semi-Pelagians claimed that fallen humans do not have the ability to do genuinely good things, but they argued that there was a general distribution of God’s grace among all humans, which brought every person back to a neutral position from which they could choose to do good or evil (this is known as “prevenient grace”).

In 529 AD, Semi-Pelagianism was also condemned as a heresy at the Council of Orange(in southern France). For the next 1,000 years, Augustine’s view of natural man’s inability to choose genuine good (Total Depravity) was the standard of orthodox Christian doctrine in Western Christianity. And yet, Semi-Pelagianism remained a constant doctrinal rival to the orthodox view, sometimes gaining and sometimes losing ground. In fact, the doctrine of “prevenient grace” was a dividing line between Roman Catholicism and Protestants during the Reformation.

Protestant Reformers vs. Roman Catholic Church on “Monergism”

During the Protestant Reformation, this millennium-old doctrinal dispute came to the fore again. This time theological terms were coined to describe the work of regeneration (This is the biblical term associated with the concept of being “born again”). The argument was set something like this: If fallen humans are in fact unable to do genuine good unless or until God enables them to do so(i.e. Total Depravity), then God must be the one who acts alone upon dead sinners to make them spiritually alive and desirous of genuine good.

Of course, this kind of reasoning was not invented by mere philosophy. This argumentation is directly drawn from Scripture. Consider Ephesians 2:1-8.

1 You were dead in the trespasses and sins 2 in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience – 3 among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind. 4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, 5 even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved— 6 and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, 7 so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. 8 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God…”

The doctrinal divide between the Reformers and the Roman Catholic Church is best summed up in two words: Monergismand Synergism.

Monergism literally means “one unit working.” Monergism, in our theological discussion, declares “God alone works to regenerate the sinner.” In other words, regeneration is an act or work of God’s grace, to which the sinner responds with faith and repentance… one has faith because he/she is born again… one is not born again because of faith.

The Protestant Reformers argued that fallen humans can do nothing to save themselves or even to make themselves savable. Salvation (particularly regeneration) is by the grace of God alone, and the sinner is merely a passive beneficiary of this miraculous divine work.

Synergism literally means “units working together.” Synergism, in our theological discussion, declares “God and the sinner cooperate in the work of regeneration.” In other words, regeneration is the cooperative work of both God and the sinner… one is born again partly because he/she has faith and partly because God graciously works spiritual life in them.

The Roman Catholic Church argued that fallen humans are indeed sinful, but God distributes “prevenient grace” to all people everywhere, which brings humans to something of a neutral state in their desire for good and evil. The sinner cooperates with this “prevenient grace” in order to prepare himself/herself (by doing genuine good) to receive God’s saving grace. In this way the Roman Catholic Church brought Semi-Pelagianism back from the heresy trashcan.

On a side note: If you are wondering where Southern Baptists land on this issue, we may look again to the Baptist Faith and Message, which says, “As soon as they [i.e. humans] are capable of moral action, they become transgressors and are under condemnation. Only the grace of God can bring man into His holy fellowship and enable man to fulfill the creative purpose of God [i.e. God’s commands].” The Baptist Faith and Message goes on to say, “Regeneration, or the new birth, is a work of God’s grace whereby believers become new creatures in Christ Jesus. It is a change of heart wrought by the Holy Spirit [i.e. brought about by the Holy Spirit] through conviction of sin, to which the sinner responds in repentance toward God and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.” Note that the Baptist Faith and Message says that ‘repentance’ and ‘faith’ are how the sinner ‘responds’ to the gracious work of regeneration. In other words, regeneration is the act of God alone, which precedes faith… This is a clear affirmation of Monergism. So, again we find that those who disagree with John Calvin (also a Monergist) are in disagreement with Southern Baptists as well.

Before there was such a thing as a Southern Baptist, and even before John Calvin was a theologian, Protestant Reformers were Monergists. Peter Waldo (born 1140), John Wycliffe (born in 1330), Jan Hus (born 1369), Martin Luther (born 1483), Ulrich Zwingli (born in 1484), Thomas Cranmer (born 1489), William Farel (born 1489), Martin Bucer (born 1491), and William Tyndale (born in 1494) were all Monergists. John Calvin wasn’t born until 1509, and Martin Luther published his masterful book (Bondage of the Will), describing the inability of man’s will and the necessity of God’s monergistic work, when John Calvin was only 16 years old.

The reason for citing all of this is, once again, to say that John Calvin did not invent what is known today as “Calvinism.” The “Five Points of Calvinism” or “TULIP,” as we shall see, is the summary of doctrines that have deep roots in Christian history. But, Christians have been looking to the Bible a long time for answers to all kinds of questions. Many of the questions that center on salvation are at the heart of Christian doctrine.

The Five Points of Calvinism

As I mentioned earlier, what often goes under the heading of “Calvinism” today was not the invention of John Calvin. In fact, anyone who has read Calvin’s writings would know that Calvin would be horrified to learn that Christians have used his name to label any doctrine. Calvin was a bookish introvert, who almost never spoke or wrote about himself. His life’s work was given to studying, preaching, and teaching the Bible. Many Christian theologians today think that Calvin was the best Christian mind up to that point in history (the 1500s), but Calvin wanted nothing of any celebrity status. At Calvin’s request, his body was buried in a mass unmarked grave when he died, because he did not want any fuss made about his burial place.

So where did the so-called “Five Points” come from? When did the TULIPs bloom? Well, simply put, it is not clear exactly when the acrostic “TULIP” was fist formulated.

As I said before, it was sometime in the 1800s when TULIP was first used to describe the “Five Points of Calvinism.” But before then, there was a statement that came out from a council of churchmen in the Netherlands, which articulated the doctrines in summary form. It is important to remember, however, the “Five Points” stated at this gathering were only in response to “five disagreements” that an outside group raised in dispute.

Synod of Dort: The Origins of TULIP

Jacobus Arminius was a Dutch theologian (1560-1609) who lived a generation after John Calvin. Arminius thought highly of Calvin, saying, “Next to the study of the Scriptures… I exhort my students to read Calvin’s Commentaries carefully and thoroughly… for I affirm that he excels beyond comparison in the interpretation of Scripture.” However, Arminius disagreed with some of Calvin’s theology. Arminius believed that God elected to save some sinners because God knew these sinners would respond positively to the gospel in the future. Arminius also believed that sinners could restrain the renewing power of the Holy Spirit and that Christians could lose their salvation if they did not persevere.

Calvin and Arminius never met (Calvin died when Arminius was 4 years old), but Arminius’s followers (known as the “Remonstrance”) organized their opposition to some of Calvin’s doctrines about 50 years after Calvin died. It all came to a head at the Synod of Dort(1618-19).[2]

The Remonstrance were 42 ministers, influenced by Arminius’ writings against some of Calvin’s theology. They petitioned the state to ask for theological allowance since Semi-Pelagianism was already classified as a heresy 1,000 years earlier. At that time in history, most Reformers were magisterial (meaning they still operated inside of a church structure that was connected to the civil magistrate). Religious freedom as we know it in America today isn’t really a thing until very recently in human history.

The Five Articles of the Remonstranceare:

Conditional Predestination: God predestines some sinners for salvation, and this predestination is conditionally based on God’s foreknowledge about each person’s anticipated faith or unbelief.

Universal Atonement: Christ died for all humans, and God intended His sacrifice for all humans, but only those sinners who accept this atoning work will be saved.

Saving Faith or Serious Depravity: Sinful and Fallen humanity is unable to attain saving faith, unless he is regenerated and renewed by God in Christ through the Holy Spirit.

Resistible Grace: The grace of God is effective, but it is resistible, so man must cooperate with God’s grace to bring about personal salvation.

Uncertainty of Perseverance: Although God’s grace is abundant, the sinner can lose that grace and become lost even after he has been saved.

The Synod of Dort ended with a judgment against Arminianism, which declared that Arminianism was a heresy alongside Semi-Pelagianism. With this judgment, the Synod produced several “canons” or statements about the doctrine of salvation, some of which became the origins of the “Five Points of Calvinism.” These five statements are commonly listed today in short form with the acrostic TULIP.

A Summary of TULIP

Regrettably, many who call themselves “Calvinists” today are merely intending to say that they affirm somewhere between 3 and 5 of the “Five Points of Calvinism.” Calvin is so much more than these isolated points. Calvin’s commentaries on various books of the Bible are a treasure to any Christian who desires to understand the depth of Scripture. Calvin’s life-long work, the “Institutes of the Christian Religion,” are a touchstone for almost every systematic theology book written in the last 500 years. I have personally found Calvin’s “Little Book on the Christian Life” to be one of the most praise-inspiring books I have ever read.

Now, don’t forget that Calvin was a sinful human just like everyone else. I am not saying that he was perfect, or that anyone should try to follow him above or even beside Christ. I am saying that Calvin was a hero of the Christian Faith, and we are fools to disregard or disparage someone like Calvin – especially if we haven’t even read anything he actually said for himself.

Another regrettable reality, when it comes to “Calvinism” today, is that the acrostic “TULIP” provides us with some less-than-helpful phrases. The flower is easy to remember, but its theological precision is quite lacking.

Here are the Five Points of Calvinismor TULIP:

Total Depravity: Fallen humans, since Adam, are affected by sin in every aspect of who they are – their bodies, minds, and wills/desires; and they are incapable of naturally doing anything genuinely good (Rom. 3:10-18).

Unconditional Election: God elects some sinners unto salvation, whereby they become beneficiaries of God’s blessings, not because of any condition in them, but according to the riches of God’s gracious grace and the purposes of His divine will (Eph. 1:3-6).

Limited Atonement: Jesus Christ’s atoning work on the cross is priceless, sufficient to cover all sin and all sinners, but Christ’s work was intentionally for those who believe and not for anyone else (Jn. 10:14-16).

Irresistible Grace: God alone causes sinners to be born again (Monergism), through the proclamation of the gospel and powerful work of His Holy Spirit. All who are born again possess new hearts with which they respond in loving affection for God, trusting and repenting by His grace (Eph. 2:1-10).

Perseverance of the Saints: All sinners whom God has elected unto Himself, those for whom Christ has died, those God has made spiritually alive, will grow in personal holiness in this life and will persevere unto glory (Rom. 8:28-39).

Not every Christian will immediately agree with these five points of Calvinism, and many Calvinists have even found some disagreement with some of these points. The object of this essay is not to convince anyone to be a Calvinist, or even to explain what Calvinism is. I have simply endeavored to give an introduction to the historical development of some of the central doctrines of Calvinism.

[1]See a very helpful breakdown of Pelagianism, Semi-Pelagianism, and Augustinianism here: https://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/onsite/semi-pelagian.html

[2]See a great historical and theological explanation of the Synod of Dort here: https://tabletalkmagazine.com/article/2018/06/the-synod-of-dort/