"You Talking To Me Willis?"

"Hyper-Calvinist!" How often have we heard this charge from Arminians launched against Calvinists that delight in the doctrines of grace. It has become the typical point of assault from many of our Arminian brothers that do not really know what Calvinism is; they seem to think that if they just tack the pejorative "hyper" onto Calvinism then everyone will flee from it. It would be interesting  to know what they actually think Calvinism is since they understand Calvinism to be "hyper-Calvinism?"

Then there are quasi Arminians that seem to understand the major role Calvinists have played in the history of the church for the Gospel's sake and want to lay claim to such heritage while rejecting the doctrines or re-defining them. Norm Geisler and his "moderate Calvinism" which is nothing more than Arminianism with a different jacket on. One cannot deny the grace of God in unconditional election and still be any kind of Calvinist! There is nothing moderate about it, since it is not Calvinism.

Then there are many Calvinists that are quick put that jacket ("hyper-Calvinist") on others Calvinists that may differ from them on issues like "common grace" (which I whole heartedly believe) and the "well-meant offer" (which I do not believe). I've heard Dr. David Engelsma, Dr. Herman Hoeksema, Dr. James White and Dr. John Gerstner, Robert Reymond all wrongly labeled "hyper- Calvinist" because they all reject the "well-meant offer."

I am not going to explain all those issues nor what real hyper-Calvinism is since this particular article is aimed at those that have some knowledge of these matters. My point is that while labels are a good thing let's be careful on knowing what the label means and that it correctly fits the people we are labeling. So much confusion can occur when wrong real labels are put on the wrong people.

At this moment I wish allow Dr. David Engelsma speak on the subject in dealing specifically with the nonsensical label of Calvinism with "hyper-Calvinism" from well noted Arminian John. R. Rice in his error and very confused slanderous book Predestined to Hell? No! Engelsma writes:

In most cases the charge "hyper-Calvinism" is nothing but a deceptive attack on Calvinism itself. Someone hates Calvinism or the uncompromising, consistent defense of Calvinism. Yet he hesitates to attack Calvinism openly and forthrightly. Therefore he disguises his attack as an attack on "hyper-Calvinism" and "hyper-Calvinists."

There is no need to refute Rice's arguments against Calvinism nor to expose his defense of Arminianism from Scripture, although a lover of the Reformed faith is sorely tempted to do this in order to lay bare the utter poverty of modern Arminianism. Rice blunders around in the Bible, as Luther said of Ersamus, the way a pig roots about in a sack of feed.

It serves our purpose to stress two things regarding the war cry "hyper-Calvinism" that become plain from such works as those of Rice. First the charge "hyper-Calvinism" masks an attack on Calvinism. Rice is an Arminian and a Pelgian. He admits to holding that every man's salvation depends on the choice of his own free will. This is Arminianism. He also maintains that men only potentially died in Adam and that the natural man who has nothing more than the testimony of God in creation may be saved  by this natural light. This is sheer Pelagianism.*

Be leery of the often tossed allegation of "hyper Calvinist" or "hyper Calvinism." Hyper Calvinism is certainly real and heretical but should never be tossed around lightly.

Soli Deo Gloria!


* David J. Engelsma, Hyper-Calvinism & The Call of the Gospel (Grand Rapids, MI.: Reformed Free Publishing Association, 1994), p. 9-12