Baptist Pastor Calls Calvinists “Grace-hating Man-loving Man-exalting Semi-Pelagian Arminian Heretics!”

Our Research Robot Monkeys have been working day and night lately so it seems. Just last night they stumbled upon horrid information which concerns us—here is a disturbing quote made by a “so-called” Baptist pastor:

There is a tendency in most of our churches to accept almost any “decision” as a real conversion, without even asking a basic question or two from the person who makes such a “decision.” They are instantly baptized with no questions asked. This method has filled our churches with unconverted people by the millions.

As a direct result of the failure of “decisionism,” a new interest in Calvinism has arisen. Calvinism is the fastest growing movement today among Baptists and other evangelicals. But while the new Calvinism theoretically explains the reason for the failure of “decisionism,” at least so far, it has not cured “decisionism.” Why? Because modern Calvinism has only explained conversion theoretically. It has not adequately applied the doctrines of total depravity and grace. Therefore, almost anyone who mentally agrees with its basic doctrines is quickly proclaimed converted and taken into the church without actually going through the experience of conversion outlined by Spurgeon in the quotation I just gave. As a result modern Calvinism explains the errors of “decisionism,” but does not cure them. In fact, the mere assent to, and belief in, the doctrines of Calvinism have become little more than a new form of “decisionism,” in a subtler form. The man who makes a “decision” to believe the doctrines is proclaimed saved! If he can explain the Calvinistic “doctrines of grace” he is accepted into the church with no questions asked about his own experience of conversion. Thus, thousands learn to explain the meaning of TULIP, and are, upon the ability to explain these doctrines, pronounced converted and taken into the churches. Therefore modern Calvinism has in no instance been connected in any way with true revival and is, in fact, little better than the average solid “decisionist” churches.

Notice that I am not speaking either for or against the doctrines they teach. I am simply saying that belief in doctrines, even true doctrines, is a mental form of “decisionism.” When you “decide” to believe the doctrines you are considered saved. This, in my view, is the weakness and error of modern Calvinism. Why? Because conversion is far more than a simple mental agreement with a list of doctrines, even true doctrines. Thus, modern Calvinism has tended to produce nothing adequate to actually cure the error of “decisionism” that has weakened our churches and filled them with so many lost souls. In fact, most of the modern Calvinists I have spoken with are still unconverted themselves. For the most part they are resting in what the older Calvinists of centuries past would call a “false hope” – the false hope that belief in correct doctrine is the equivalent of true conversion. But “doctrinal belief” is not true conversion. If the modern Calvinistic movement realizes that, and applies their doctrines, they might very well see many real conversions, and perhaps even true revival. But they must discover again the old methods of evangelism and preach “the old truths” to the unconverted Calvinists in their own congregations, or else, in spite of their doctrinal belief in Calvinism, I fear that many modern Calvinists will go into “the fire that never shall be quenched. Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched” (Mark 9:43-44).

You see there—he just called our Pure Doctrines “Grace-hating Man-loving Man-exalting Semi-Pelagian Heresy”  by saying that:

the doctrines of Calvinism have become little more than a new form of “decisionism,” in a subtler form. The man who makes a “decision” to believe the doctrines is proclaimed saved! If he can explain the Calvinistic “doctrines of grace” he is accepted into the church with no questions asked about his own experience of conversion. Thus, thousands learn to explain the meaning of TULIP, and are, upon the ability to explain these doctrines, pronounced converted and taken into the churches.

As  we all know Decisionism is nothing but  “Grace-hating Man-loving Man-exalting Semi-Pelagian Heresy” aka Free-Willing Arminianism and as we also know Pure Doctrines always produce True Converts. Spurgeon would have a heart-attack if he were alive today to witness such a “Downgrade” against Pure Doctrines. We also know that Calvinism and Decisionism are oxymorons as Calvinism aka the Doctrines of Grace aka the Pure and True Gospel of God’s Grace has nothing to do with exercising Free Will to make a decision about anything as God has already made all decisions from the foundation of the world by an unchangeable Absolute Decree. Arminians attack God’s Absolute Sovereignty which is evil in and of itself but it is even more evil to attack the Absolute Sovereignty of our Pure Doctines. Sharin’ Whiplash‘s evil twin Witless Sharon upon hearing  Dr. R. L. Hymers, Jr.’s teachings against our Sound Doctrines responded with this attack:

One of my all-time heroes of the faith. What a great man, and greatly used of God. Thank You, Lord, for Your servant, Dr. R. L. Hymers, Jr, without whom we would be still struggling in the darkness of Romanist Genevan Papist Calvinism, that man-exalting heresy.

Clearly this proves how heretical Baptists truly are even Reformed Baptists as Reformed and Baptist are oxymorons since Baptists were never Truly Reformed to begin with. We ask you this Discernmentalists—did you make a decision by exercise of Free Will to become a Calvinist or be a disciple of the Pure Doctrines of Grace and if so we would like to know when and at what time? Also did you freely choose to be Calvinist either by reading TULIP into the Bible apart from a prior reading of Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion or hearsay from others or by making a “decision” to believe the Pure Doctrines of Grace after hearing a Calvinistic sermon preached? See how errant Dr. R. L. Hymers, Jr.’s teachings against our Sound Doctrines are—We Know because  we told you so.

P. S. On a serious note we recommend these excellent resources on Calvin and Calvinism: The Many Faces of John Calvin, The Unaccommodated Calvin: Studies in the Foundation of a Theological Tradition , http://www.pcusa.org/today/index.htm, Elected to What ?!, How Meeting Real Christians from Different Traditions Makes a Real Difference and What is ‘Oasis’?.

<!–. 1″>  pgs.
–>

Advertisements

Baptists Are Confused And Diseased People

Oh how  we loathe those Baptists eventhough they practice True Biblical Baptism by Immersion as βαπτίζω literally means immerse not sprinkle—they are still heretics for not being Reformed enough. We Know because of Calvin’s clear teachings on infant baptism and as you know Calvin’s views should be placed above scripture. In other words, the Bible should always be read through the lens of Calvin only. We also Know that sprinkling is unbiblical and comes from the Roman Catholic tradition—we’ll deny this though: ” There are sound biblical reasons for the historic Reformed view of infant baptism by sprinkling. We don’t do it because we adopted it from Roman Catholics, either.”

However, John MacArthur in a rare unReformed moment stated:

There are five reasons why I reject infant baptism. I’m telling you folks, I can’t get all that I want to say out this morning so you’re only going to get, I hope, the best of what’s here. But, these are very important points. 1. Point number one, and this ought to end the argument: infant baptism is not in Scripture. 2. The second reason is really the other side of the issue. I don’t believe in infant baptism because infant baptism is not Christian baptism. 3. Third point, why I reject infant baptism: it is not a replacement sign for the Abrahamic sign of circumcision. 4. Well, let me give you a fourth reason. I reject infant baptism because infant baptism is not consistent with the nature of the church. 5. One last point and I’ll let you go. Infant baptism is not consistent with the gospel.

However, we can forgive Dr. MacArthur and extend Grace to him for his unReformed errors of rejecting Calvin’s clear teachings and Pure Baptism Doctrines though we cannot forgive and extend Grace to those evil Arminian, Lutheran, Baptist/Anabaptist and Emerging/Emergent heretics. Now we must warn you about just how evil, impure, unsafe and unhealthy Biblical Baptism by Immersion really is:

First of all, Sharin’ Whiplash has stated:

” Helwysfan, I’m guessing you’re a Baptist. I do get really tired of the superior attitude  many credobaptists have towards paedobaptists today. (We don’t have superior attitudes about being Calvinists and Presbyterians you know!) If you know the truth you can discern what’s false…many of today’s Baptists view themselves as having “super Christian” status because of their views on water baptism, and will unabashedly state things like “ours is the biblical view of baptism”… and will say or imply unhesitantly that there’s no biblical basis whatsoever for the paedo view. I’m fed up with that. This morning a credobaptist posted something about a paedobaptist changing positions… and there was the presumption that the paedo had finally seen the light. Let me say this… there are more Baptists who become Presbyterians than the other way around. I guarantee it. Baptists may be Calvinists, but they are not, strictly speaking, Reformed. Only Presbyterians are Truly Reformed. Anabaptists, Reformed/Presbyterians, Lutherans, and Anglicans are 4 separate branches with separate traditions. All four branches are Reformed from Roman Catholicism in the broad sense of the term, but Baptists come from the Anabaptist branch, since they define themselves by their views on water baptism. A small percentage of Anabaptists followed Calvin’s theology on everything except baptism, though most of them followed Arminius. In any event, the vast majority of Christians, when taken as a whole, are paedobaptists, and that has been the case historically. 

Secondly, We Know that there’s a lot of confusion and mythology about Baptists as they are confused people or as Sharin’ Whiplash states as well: 

What is so bizarre is that eternal security is like article I of Baptist faith, but Anabaptists are classic Arminians –no security for them!…confused and confusing, even to themselves. Baptists want to be free-willers to choose salvation if and when they’re ready, but once they’ve made their ‘decision’ and are saved through Believer’s Baptism, they want to pass the buck to God to keep them that way. Baptists, with their muddled theology, think they should have the best of both worlds, so to speak. I find that very annoying. Certainly Credobaptism is evil since it promotes confusion this is why I Thank You, Lord, for Your servant, Jean Cauvin, without whom we would be still struggling in the darkness of Credobaptism, that man-exalting heresy! Besides Immersion sounds too much like the heresy of Emergent/Emerging or Emergence Christianity.

Lastly, We Know that baptism by sprinkling is safer, Purer, cleaner and healthier than baptism by Immersion as there is less of a chance of getting these Baptist related diseases: Baptici hereticus part of the Bapticus bacterium family or it’s close relatives in the Semi-Pelagite bacterium family Semi-Pelagiseses, Semi-Pelagoids and Semi-Pelagianism also known as Arm and Hand Disease or Arminianism. We Know that the less water used the cleaner one gets. We also Know that full Immersion in water eventhough it may look clean it is still dirty and full of these diseases—and to fully immerse in Baptismal waters causes full contact with them. This is why we must sprinkle so that we don’t become Baptist heretics. And so just remember—We Know!