Q: HOW DO YOU DEFINE HYPER CALVINIST?
A: If a person holds to reprobation, this is a clear sign. If anyone
believes that God has created souls damned to hell, and predestined
them to hell, then they would be a poster child for Hyper Calvinism. To
do so, they would have to jump over all of the biblical texts we cite.
They usually stick to the same four or five they like. That is why I
used 1 Timothy 2:1-8.
A second point would be the issue of infant damnation. Drs. Akin and
Mohler have been explicit on the fact that if an infant dies, they go
to heaven. Dr. White does not believe it is that “simple.” If anyone
believes that there is even the possibility of an infant (”non-elect”)
going to hell, that would be clear hyper Calvinism. Since they do not
like that term, I have also offered neo-Calvinist. Apparently that
isn’t acceptable either.
Those who fit in that category usually define “hyper Calvinist” in
terms of an ethic – they say that since we cannot know the fixed
number, we tell everyone. They call it a “well-intentioned offer.” That
is simply poor logic. I repeatedly ask them, “Will the elect get saved,
whether we tell them or not?” Obviously, if you hold to hyper
Calvinism, you must ultimately answer “yes.”
Q: DIDN’T YOU SAY THAT CALVINISTS ARE WORSE THAN MUSLIMS?
A: Yes, absolutely. For a small portion of these people, just daring
to question the Bezian movement is heresy. They will blog and e-mail
incessantly. I call it a “Calvinist Jihad,” because just like Muslims,
they believe they are defending the honor of their view. They can
discuss nothing else. I have even had a few call for my head! Dr.
Falwell and I have laughed about it, because they are so insistent, and
they miss the point completely. There are plenty of schools to which
the neo-Calvinists can go, but Liberty will be a lighthouse for
missions and evangelism to the “whosoever wills.” Period.
The difference is, Muslims know when to quit – for these guys, it is the only topic about which they can talk.