Question of Clarification

[intricatic]

I had originally posted this in General Theology, and was dirrected here. So, to clarify why I'm asking this, Calvinism is my next target in theological systems to research and study. Why? Because I'm a weird person who's obsessed with theology/apologetics, and I want to know as much as possible about the different systems of theology - not to mention, I've always been drawn to the way most Calvinists think, and I'm curious about it. So, without further ado;

I dunno if this is the right place to post this, but I had some questions I'd like to throw out there. I haven't had much opportunity to explore Calvinism yet - I have a few books on order [ specifically This Book, and This Book] - but I was wondering whether Calvinism isn't just the 5 T.U.L.I.P. statements, or is it something more?

If it's something more, what else is entailed within Calvinism that sets it aside from other theological systems?

[I know, this is a hefty topic, but I'd appreciate any insightful points I could keep my eyes out for, book suggestions, your own take on it, etc...]

 

[Ryft]

I was wondering whether Calvinism isn't just the 5 T.U.L.I.P. statements, or is it something more?

It is something considerably 'more'.

The "five points" are not a summation of Reformed theology—although in a sense it is perhaps the soteriological heart of Reformed theology, it is not even close to a summation (e.g. TULIP tells us nothing about the canon of Scriptures, the nature of Christ, God's law, etc). It was actually the Remonstrants (i.e. Arminians, but they objected to that name), not Calvinists, who first developed the "five points" in their historical Remonstrance document of 1610. The Reformed churches of the Netherlands responded with the five heads of doctrine detailed in The Decision of the Synod of Dordrecht on the Five Main Points of Doctrine in Dispute in the Netherlands (or The Canons of Dort); it is from these five heads of doctrine that we get the "TULIP" (although this acrostic was a later development). In other words, it was the five responses of the Dutch Reformed church specifically to the five errors of the Remonstrants. That was its only aim.

If you are interested in a fuller summation of Reformed theology, examine the Westminster Confession of Faith, The Belgic Confession of Faith, and The Heidelberg Catechism. To make your life easier, you could always just download the Reformed Confessions 3.0 by Daric Bossman (here), which comes in a Windows 'Help' file format. Reformed Confessions 3.0 contains:

1. The Apostles' Creed
2. The Nicene Creed
3. The Athanasian Creed
4. The Chalcedonian Creed
5. The Belgic Confession of Faith
6. The Canons of Dort
7. The Heidelberg Catechism
8. The Westminster Confession of Faith
9. The Larger Catechism
10. The Shorter Catechism
11. The French Confession
12. The Second Helvetic Confession
13. The Waldensian Confession
14. The Thirty-nine Articles of Religion
15. The Savoy Declaration of Faith andOrder
16. The London Confession of BaptistFaith
17. The Children's Catechism
18. The Shorter Catechism
19. The Lausanne Covenant
20. The Manila Manifesto
21. The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy

 

[Elderone]

I second Ryft's suggestion, start with the study of the Westminster Confession of Faith and the Larger and Shorter Catechisms. They are reliable, concise, summaries of the Bible's teaching which have stood the test of hundreds of years.

 

[GrinningDwarf]

The previous are indeed two good answers. The confessions and catechisms are excellent resources for Reformed theology. However, they can still easily be misunderstood by people steeped in twentieth century presuppositions.

For a clearer layman's explanation, I would also include the following:

Chosen By God by RC Sproul
God of Promise: Introducing Covenant Theology by Michael Horton
Debating Calvinism: Five Points, Two Views by Dave Hunt and James White

 

[Ryft]

Debating Calvinism: Five Points, Two Views was a fascinating read. White's presentation was focused, articulate, and unswervingly scriptural. My only problem was that Hunt's arguments were so weak. That could, however, be the inherent consequence of Arminian theology; it is by nature weak. Also, Hunt's introductory chapter committed a brutally obvious 'ad hominem' fallacy: calling for the rejection of Reformed theology on account of Calvin's character (which Hunt did not bother to present responsibly). I suspect that Hunt's only logical recourse would be Open Theism, but that's another can of worms entirely. (Incidentally, John Frame's No Other God was a sharp critique of that apostasy.)

Another rather excellent presentation of biblical soteriology is The God Who Justifies by James R. White. I enthusiastically endorse that work and recommend it to any brother or sister in Christ.

 

[heymikey80]

I might also say: these are the simple precept-oriented bits of Calvinism. Calvinism is more than precepts, its unity more than on ideology, its life is more of finding our proper place in the family and kingdom of God and living it out. "Semper Reformanda" ("always being reformed") is a heady ideal. Calvin found his place in the Reformation humbling and great at the same time, as he sought unity where he thought he ought, even among those he disagreed with in some (to him) more minor matters.

"Institutes of the Christian Religion" is really the result of Calvin's efforts; and "Calvin's Commentaries" and his sermons (not as fully collected) are the long narratives. "Secret Providence" and "Eternal Predestination" are a couple of his outbursts, along with "On the Necessity of Reforming the Church." And "Short Treatise on the Lord's Supper" is a nice, brief introduction to his kind of thinking.

"Institutes" I found very hard to read straight through the first time I did it, because so much of it is now shared among most theologies. So skip around, pass over the sections that're obvious to you. It's the differences that you're interested in, right?