New.Demonstration
- Random Quote
A genuine Gospel-faith has nothing selfish about it – it never makes a man think only of his own salvation. It stirs him up, on the contrary, to concern about the souls of others. I always suspect that those who care nothing whether their brethren are saved or not, must in reality be ignorant or thoughtless about their own state.
— , Tract: The Character of the True Christian
‘The world should realize with increased clearness that Evangelicalism stands or falls with Calvinism.’1
The great princeton theologian Benjamin Breckinridge Warfield wrote those words a century ago. At the time, Calvinism still had a major influence on evangelicalism, helping to define its theology, shape its spirituality, and clarify its mission. That is no longer as true as it once was. Increasingly Calvinism is defined over against evangelicalism, and while many Calvinists still consider themselves evangelicals, most evangelicals are suspicious of Calvinism.
On a first reading, therefore, Warfield’s claim seems excessive, and probably false. One doubts whether it would find widespread acceptance in the contemporary church. What has Calvinism to do with evangelicalism? And why would the vitality of the evangelical church in any way depend on Calvinist theology?
As surprising as it may seem, Warfield’s claim is the thesis of this book, namely, that evangelicalism stands or falls with Calvinism. To put this in a slightly less provocative way, evangelicalism needs Calvinism. In order to see why this is so, it helps to remove the labels.
By “Evangelicalism,” Warfield essentially meant what German Lutherans meant when they first started using the term during the Protestant Reformation: a church founded on the gospel, the good news if salvation through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. And when Warfield spoke of “Calvinism,” he was referring to the Protestant Reformation, with its insistence on justification by grace alone, through faith alone, because of Christ alone.
To put it more simply, evangelicalism stands for the gospel and Calvinism stands for grace. What Warfield was really saying, therefore, is something that every Christian should and must believe: the gospel stands or falls by grace.
As Warield recognized, the gospel is not really the gospel unless it is a gospel of grace; in other words, the gospel is only good news if it announces what God has done to save sinners.
And if that is true, then the gospel stands or falls with the doctrines of grace.
—James Montgomery Boice and Philip Graham Ryken, The Doctrines of Grace: Rediscovering the Evangelical Gospel (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2002.), p17-18.
Footnotes
- B. B. Warfield, quoted in Arthur C. Custance, The Sovereignty of Grace (Phillipsburg, N.J.: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1979), 83-84. [↩]
Read Also...
Evangelicalism Stands or Falls with Calvinism
—On Reformation Theology and the Gospel
This post is written by JM Vergara on Dec 28, 2009 and is filed under Doctrines of Grace, James Boice, Reformed Theology.
This post has 2 comments. Share your thoughts with us.
+ Stay Updated on N.D.
2 Responsesto Evangelicalism Stands or Falls with Calvinism
Five Point
Wow, what a great quote. Thanks for posting.
[Reply]
Don
Couldn't agree more. I think the biggest problems we calvinist-evangelicals have is the misunderstanding of 'labels' both by believers and the world in general.
I just hate undefined terms. This quote is an excellent example of good definition.
We used to use the term evangelical to identify what kind of Christians we are. (Even the label “Christian” was the worlds attempt to define those who followed Christ. Acts 11:26 [show] and when he had found him, he brought him to Antioch. For a whole year they met with the church and taught a great many people. And in Antioch the disciples were first called Christians. (ESV)
). Now the terms evangelical has been so widely used and abused that it is no longer definitive.
The term 'reformed' is fairly widely used amongst Calvinists, but I'm not sure that its a term widely understood by either Christians or the world, so I tend to use it only with those whom I know appreciate its nuance.
I have two problems with the label 'Calvinist'. It has so much baggage encumbered with it, most of which is the result of a complete ignorance of what Calvin actually stood for. The second reason is that I'm uncomfortable with any label that attaches me to another 'man'. I am not a follower of Calvin – I read his theology, I accept his theology, but I am a Christ follower – not a man follower.
[Reply]
If you want to comment, please read the following guidelines. These are designed to protect you and other users of the site.
In order to keep these experiences enjoyable and interesting for all of our users, we ask that you follow the above guidlines. Feel free to engage, ask questions, and tell us what you are thinking! insightful comments are most welcomed.
Leave a Comment Subscribe to this discussion via RSS