Can you please define it for me then since I'm an ignorant idiot?
Well, we finally agree on something!
Contemporary meanings and usages of hyper-Calvinism
The prefix "hyper" may be used generically to refer to anything that goes beyond the accepted norm. For this reason, any Calvinistic view regarded as going beyond orthodox Calvinism is sometimes referred to as "hyper-Calvinism." This non-technical usage, often derogatory, has been applied to a variety of doctrines and ideas:
- God is the source of sin and of evil
- a sign of election must be sought prior to repentance
- men have no will of their own and secondary causes are of no effect
- the number of the elect at any time may be known by men
- it is wrong to proselytize
- there is no common grace
- God cares only for his elect and has nothing but hatred for the non-elect
- only Calvinists are Christians
"Classical" Hyper-Calvinist doctrine
The archetypal Hyper-Calvinist position may be found explicitly set forth in the confessional articles of the Gospel Standard (Baptist) Churches, specifically:
Articles of Faith of the Gospel Standard Aid and Poor Relief Societies, (Leicester, England: Oldham & Manton Ltd., n.d.).
Article 26 in that publication reads:
"We deny duty faith and duty repentance these terms suggesting that it is every man's duty spiritually and savingly to repent and believe. We deny also that there is any capability in man by nature to any spiritual good whatever. So that we reject the doctrine that man in a state of nature should be exhorted to believe in or turn to God" (emphasis added).
And Article 33 says,
"Therefore, that for ministers in the present day to address unconverted persons, or indiscriminately all in a mixed congregation, calling upon them to savingly repent, believe, and receive Christ, or perform any other acts dependent upon the new creative power of the Holy Ghost, is, on the one hand, to imply creature power, and on the other, to deny the doctrine of special redemption."
Wayman contends that saving faith was not in the power of man at his best before the fall and therefore makes the following deduction, "What Adam had, we all had in him; and what Adam lost, we all lost in him, and are debtors to God on both accounts; but Adam had not the faith of God's elect before the fall, and did not lose it for his posterity; therefore they are not debtors to God for it while in unregeneracy" (A Further Enquiry after Truth, London: J & J. Marshall, 1738, p. 51).
John Brine gives some insight into Wayman's statement. Brine taught that every duty incumbent on Adam in his unfallen state he also had the ability to perform, and this duty extends to all men in their fallen state regardless of their lack of ability. Brine maintained that a lack of ability does not release a man from duty (with which most Calvinists would agree), but he sees salvation in a different category because, "with respect to special faith in Christ, it seems to me that the powers of man in his perfected state were not fitted and disposed to that act" (A Refutation of Arminian Principles, London, 1743, p. 5.)
Accordingly, saving faith lay not within the powers of man in his unfallen state, because there was no necessity for it. Since, therefore, it was not part of his powers in his unfallen state, it could not now be required of him in his fallen state. On this basis, duty-faith and duty-repentance are denied by the Hyper-Calvinist.
Historic Calvinists regard repentance and faith as the means by which the great commandments to love God and love our neighbor finds fulfillment. Since historic Calvinists believe that this duty to love God and neighbor existed before the fall and that Adam certainly enjoyed the ability to fulfill this obligation, they argue that man's love of God is still obligatory and that the means through which it is to be realized, namely repentance and faith, are likewise obligatory. Therefore, historic Calvinism has rejected this form of Hyper-Calvinism.
)
