The Calvary Stance on God
December 23rd, 2003The Calvary system has missed two fundamental beliefs that are Biblical, historical and critical to the life of the believer. These errors bring about a considerable change in the way Christians live, evangelize and understand who God is as revealed in Scripture. And it is these errors that I believe are significant enough that we can not recommend Calvary churches beyond 3 stars. The first error attacks God’s Sovereignty and the second confuses who the Church is.
Calvary’s Attack on God’s Sovereignty
Sovereignty Definition – When we speak of God’s Sovereignty we mean God’s absolute control, that all things work out according to the purposes of God who both knows these and ordains that they come to pass.
This attack finds its roots in the 17th Century where Jacobus Arminius wanted to ‘protect’ God from being considered the author of sin and make man free from the constraints of God’s sovereignty. He presented that election was based on God’s foreknowledge of who would accept Christ on their own. He taught that men could ‘save themselves’ if they exercised their free will (outside of God’s control) and work towards a faith in Jesus Christ as Lord.
Philippians 1:29 “For to you it has been granted on behalf of Christ, not only to believe in Him, but also to suffer for His sake.” This teaches that suffering for Christ is a gift, along with believing in Him. Both are gifts, and both are from God.”
Ephesians 2:8-9 “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast”
The result is that Ephesians 2:8-9 would be wrong, that faith is not a gift but a work that Christians do even though we are told that no one seeks after God (see Romans 3). Further because we have ‘chosen’ our faith we also can ‘lose’ our faith. The belief can be expressed this way; Christ made the down payment on our salvation on the cross, however once a person is saved he has to keep up the payments through being faithful and good works. This serious error therefore bases salvation on the ability of a person to merit their salvation by their good works. Clearly the Bible condemns this false teaching. This error was once considered heresy in the early church but now has become common teaching in many mainstream churches.
The consequences are believers are never certain of their salvation and it leads to a works based faith. On good days if a believer dies, they go to heaven, but if they die on a bad day where they ‘backslide’ then they can go to hell. I have seen this lived out in friends and family who feel it necessary to go to church every day of the week; they never have a chance to go out into the world and live the gospel. There never is a confidence and trusting that the believe is secure in God’s hand and His grace now in a position to respond to this by being obedient.
It also impacts evangelism as people feel like they can ‘convince’ people to come to God. Through emotional pleas and timely alter calls if the Pastor does a good enough job, his abilities and convincing will do the work to save the lost. The Spirit of God is not seen as the only agent that opens the eyes of the unbeliever, it is only through getting the person to say the “Sinner’s Prayer”.
We can have assurance of salvation because it is a gift from God, He will not lose us:
John 6:40 And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that of all He has given Me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day.
John 10:27-29 My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father’s hand.
This does not mean that we should now not do ‘works of righteousness’. As believers we should bear fruit that demonstrate that we are God’s.
John 15:16 You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you to go and bear fruit–fruit that will last. Then the Father will give you whatever you ask in my name.
John 15:5 “I am the vine; you are the branches. If a man remains in me and I in him, he will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing.
Calvary’s Confusion on God’s People (Who is Israel)
Calvary believes in what is called Dispensationalism. They believe that throughout the ages God is pursuing two distinct purposes: one related to earth with an earthly people and earthly objectives involved which is Judaism; while the other is related to heaven with heavenly people… which is Christianity.”
Galatians 6:15-16 tells us, “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature. And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God.” Paul is certainly not saying that the Old Covenant nation of Israel walks after that “rule” (salvation), as he knows clearly that they are lost, and will perish in their sins without Christ. Neither is Paul wishing peace upon the lost nation, for, having “great heaviness and continual sorrow in (his) heart” (Romans 9:1) regarding them, he knows the only peace is in Jesus Christ. Therefore, it appears, according to Scripture, that the only Biblical Israelite is the individual, regardless of lineage, who is ‘in Christ’ through salvation.
As a consequence to this misunderstanding, there are Calvary churches that make yearly pilgrimages to Israel bringing checks for the politicians of Israel. One church I knew raised ½ Million and flew it to Israel. This is money that could be used to fund Church plants, missionaries and ministry to those in need. Instead it supports a nation that does not worship God.

February 24th, 2005 at 3:09 pm
Now there are differen view’s on scripture. my concern is that some my think they have a corner on the truth. now if the calvary stance is not a good stance. what should all of us be looking to as the right stance on God’s soverinty and how the people of Israel fit into todays would.
Thank you
May 30th, 2005 at 12:59 pm
no answer yet scared to answer?
June 2nd, 2005 at 9:56 am
Shawn,
We should look to Scripture for the right stance. Just because there are differing views doesn’t mean there isn’t a correct view.
June 21st, 2005 at 12:46 am
I love that you did this sight to warn people about cults. I wonder how bias you are? You are Quite hard on calvary chapels though.
Forgive me but it sounds like one or more rubbed you the wrong way and caused you to blackball them all. Please pray about this.
What is the price of being contriversal? I would not want to be in Howard Sterns spirit when he faces Jesus. Amen?
June 21st, 2005 at 11:06 am
Chad,
I don’t think we are ‘being hard on Calvary’. Our goal is to present God’s Word and why we disagree with their stance. There are consequences to mis-applying scripture and we want to discuss these.
Overall, Calvary churches are brothers in the Lord who desire that all people come to know Jesus Christ. For that I am thankful!
September 4th, 2005 at 4:36 pm
In the 17th Century, the concept of Faithfulness was attacked by Calvin’s over-exaggerated view of pre-destination. It was taken to the point that he preached “a man had no say whatsoever - - God granted salvation to whosoever He willed” and also refused it to the whosoever He willed as well.
In reaction to that narrow view of God’s Sovereignty, people with a deep understanding of God’s love and purpose rose up against the dogma. Many were burned at the stake for their conviction - - that Father God would accept the sincere repentance of ANY man. And just as God allowed one of His highest Arch angels to fall, likewise would accept man’s choice to turn away from Him.
This reply to Calvinism finds its roots in the 17th Century theology of James Arminius. Anglican, Methodist, Holiness, Nazarene, Pentecostal, and most 20th Century born church movements hold to Arminianism over Calvinism.
If one would reject Calvary Chapels and Vineyards for being Arminian, one would also rule out all these other denominations for the same reason.
As for judging Dispensationalism, now we are criticizing the theological constructs in just about every denominational paradigm. For example, Baptists say the gift of healing and the speaking of tongues is not for today because “we are in a different dispensation.” And so on . . .
One of my professors in Seminary always used to say, “The theology that is perfect is the one you possess when you see Him face to face. All others are subject to refining as we approach that day.”
But I think we all know that.
September 21st, 2005 at 2:20 pm
I’m not sure if I could trust your evaluation. Firstly, because you got the wrong person that help build the theological framework that Calvary Chapel doctrine on Theology proper and Soteriology. His name is Luis Molina 1535–1600and he was a spanish Jesuit counter-reformation thelogian.
Second of all. You spelled Arminius’ name incorrectly. His name is spelled Jacobus Arminius and he was a Dutch Theologian c.1559-1609. John Wesley was significantly influenced by Arminius view of sanctification.
Third I think you mean CC holds to a Dispensational Theology as opposed to a Reformed Covenantal Theological view of ecclesiology & soteriology.
So if you want to get really technical with names and theological categories, CC holds to a Wesleyan/Arminian/Molinist doctrine of scripture with a dispensational historical methodological approach towards interpreting God’s plan of salvation.
Besides these corrections, I think your right.
–
Joel A. Montes
M.Div. Student
Talbot Theological Seminary
Biola University
September 21st, 2005 at 4:15 pm
Joel,
Thanks for your post. First, I corrected the misspelling. Thanks.
“Third I think you mean CC holds to a Dispensational Theology as opposed to a Reformed Covenantal Theological view of ecclesiology & soteriology.”
Where does it state otherwise. I see it reads, “Calvary believes in what is called Dispensationalism.”
“Besides these corrections, I think your right.”
I believe most people who study these issues come to the same conclusion.