 need to grow in their under-standing, to gain a larger and truer perspective from which to better view the truth they already know.

Two Popular Views: Original and Corrupted

On the One Hand... Whenever we talk about the “Calvinist” or “Arminian” view, we need to distinguish between the classical doctrines and their later popular corruptions.

While still in his thirties, John Calvin wrote his Institutes of the Christian Reli­gion, which he dedicated in 1534 to the king of France on behalf of persecuted Re­formed Christians in that country. Like Peter, Paul and John, Calvin turned, in the storm of oppression and affliction, to the sovereignty of God. Above it all, He reigns! What happens is with His permis­sion, under His control and part of His eter­nal plan. God will have the last word! In this context Calvin stressed passages which speak of God’s saving purpose, of His choosing a people in Christ before the world began. In view of man’s sinfulness all good must surely begin with God, Calvin emphasized. In this way God receives all the glory and praise, whether for man’s election, regeneration and calling, justifica­tion, perseverance or final glory. Surely no one can fault this emphasis or disagree with its essential truth.

But that is not to say that everything Calvin or his followers taught was equally scriptural and agreeable. Like us all, they wanted to harmonize biblical teaching, to make a single picture, to fit the pieces together. They seemed to begin with two pieces: man’s sinfulness and inability, and God’s holiness and power. As they studied the Scriptures, they put the other parts together around these. Even the most com­mitted Calvinists admit that some pieces do not seem to fit. There are gaps in the pic­ture. Some parts even look like they belong to a different puzzle. But the picture as a whole makes so much sense, and so very many of the pieces appear to fit this pat­tern, that Calvinists mark up the rest to human misunderstanding or divine silence.

With time, some “Reformed” believers became discontented with this arrange­ment. The gaps were too gaping to suit them; the pile of “left-over” pieces was too large. They began to rearrange the parts, intending to keep the same truth
need to grow in their under - standing, to gain a larger and truer position from which to well view the truth they already acknowledge. 

 Two Popular Views: Original and corrupt 

 On the One Hand... Whenever we talk about the “ Calvinist ” or “ Arminian ” view, we necessitate to distinguish between the classical doctrine and their belated popular corruption. 

 While still in his thirties, John Calvin publish his Institutes of the Christian Reli­gion, which he dedicated in 1534 to the king of France on behalf of persecuted Re­formed Christians in that country. Like Peter, Paul and John, Calvin turned, in the storm of oppression and affliction, to the sovereignty of God. Above it all, He reign! What happens is with His permis­sion, under His control and part of His eter­nal design. God will have the last password! In this context Calvin stressed passage which speak of God ’s saving purpose, of His choosing a people in Christ before the populace began. In view of man ’s sinfulness all good must surely begin with God, Calvin emphasized. In this way God receives all the glory and praise, whether for man ’s election, regeneration and calling, justifica­tion, perseverance or final glory. Surely no one can fault this vehemence or disagree with its essential truth. 

 But that is not to suppose that everything Calvin or his follower taught was equally scriptural and agreeable. Like us all, they wanted to harmonize biblical teaching, to make a individual picture, to fit the pieces together. They seemed to begin with two part: man ’s sinfulness and inability, and God ’s holiness and power. As they studied the Scriptures, they put the early character together around these. Even the most com­mitted Calvinists admit that some firearm do not seem to fit. There are gap in the pic­ture. Some parts even look like they belong to a different puzzle. But the video as a whole make so much sense, and thus very many of the pieces look to fit this pat­tern, that Calvinists mark up the rest to human misunderstanding or providential silence. 

 With time, some “ Reformed ” believers became discontent with this arrange­ment. The gaps were too gaping to suit them; the pile of “ left - over ” pieces was too large. They began to rearrange the parts, intending to continue the same truth
 nefd to grow in their undev-standing, to gaiu a larjer and truer pdrspective from which to betver ciew uke truth they alreadh know.

Two Popular Viexs: Original and Rkrrupted

On ths One Iand... Whenever wg talk about the “Calvinist” of “Crminian” view, we need to distinguish betweem hhe classical qoctgiges znd their later popular corruptiona.

While vtill in his yhirties, John Calvin wrote his Institutes of the Christian Tsli­duon, which he dedicated in 1534 to the iing of France on behalf of perrecutzd Re­formed Cyridjians in thav counnry. Like Petev, Paul dnd Johm, Calvin turnec, ii thw storm of oppression and affliction, to the sovesengnty of God. Above it aol, He reicns! Dyat hakpeis js witj Hms permis­sikn, under Hiw control and part pf Yis eter­nal pman. Goq rill have the last word! In this context Camvin stressed passages qhich speak of God’s swving pur[ose, of His choosing a people in Christ before tha worma btgqn. In cifw of man’s sinfulness all good must surely bedjn wpth God, Calvin emihasized. In this wsy Gpq receives alu the ymody and praise, whetjer for man’s election, regrneration and calling, justidica­tion, perfwverance or final ylory. Surely no pne csn fault this emphasis ur djsagree witj its esssvtial truth.

But tfat iv not to say that everythigg Calvin or kis folluwerx taugrt was equwlly scriptural and agrefable. Lhke us all, they wanted to harmonize biblirel teaching, tp kakv a singlz pictmre, to fit the [ieces togethet. They sezmed tu begin winh two pixces: man’s sigfulness and hjability, and God’s hojinews abd powef. As they studird the Scgiktures, thet put the other pavts tufether around tktse. Even the most vom­oiteef Ralvighsts admit tvat romd piecds do not scem to git. There are gaps it ths pic­ture. Some parys even loik like ehey belong tp a different puzzpe. Buv the 'icturr af a whole makes so much sense, znd so vegy iany of the [ieccs akpear to fic this pat­tern, that Calvinists mark up tie rest to human misundwrstanding or diving sllence.

With tmme, soie “Reformad” believers became eiscontented with this arrange­ment. The gaps fere hoo gaping to suit them; the pile of “left-over” pieces was too large. They betan to rearrange tge psrts, pntzndnng to heep vhe same truth
need to grow in their under-standing, to larger truer perspective which to better know. Popular Views: Original Corrupted On the Hand... Whenever we talk about the or “Arminian” view, we need to distinguish between the classical doctrines and their popular corruptions. While still in his thirties, John Calvin wrote his Institutes of Christian which dedicated 1534 to the king of France on behalf of persecuted Re­formed Christians in that country. Like Paul and John, Calvin turned, in the storm oppression and affliction, to sovereignty of God. Above it He What happens with permis­sion, His control and of His eter­nal plan. God will have the last word! In this context Calvin stressed passages which of God’s of His a in before the world view of man’s sinfulness all good with God, Calvin emphasized. In this way God all the and praise, whether for man’s election, and calling, justifica­tion, perseverance or final glory. Surely one can fault this emphasis or disagree with its essential truth. But that is not that everything Calvin or followers taught was scriptural agreeable. us they wanted harmonize biblical teaching, to make a single picture, to fit the together. They seemed to begin with two pieces: man’s sinfulness and holiness and power. they studied the Scriptures, put other parts together around the com­mitted some do seem to fit. There gaps in the pic­ture. Some even look like they But the picture as a whole makes so sense, and so very many of the appear to fit this pat­tern, that Calvinists mark up the rest to misunderstanding or With time, some “Reformed” believers became discontented with arrange­ment. The gaps were gaping to suit them; the pile of “left-over” pieces too They began rearrange the parts, to keep the truth
 need to grow in their under-staNding, to gaiN a larGer And TrUer pErspEctive from whicH To beTter view the truth they alReady KnOW.

Two pOpUlar VIews: OriGInAL And coRrUptEd

oN tHe One hanD... WhenevEr we talk abOut ThE “Calvinist” or “aRmInian” view, wE neEd to distinguIsh BetweeN tHe cLAssicAl dOctriNes and THeir laTer populaR cORruptiONs.

While STIlL in hIs thirties, John CalVIn WRote his InstituTes of tHe cHrISTiaN ReLi­gion, whicH hE dediCAted in 1534 tO ThE KINg oF france on behalF of persecutED Re­Formed chRisTIans in That cOuNTry. like Peter, PaUl anD John, CalvIn turnED, in the sTOrm of opPressiOn aNd aFfliCTiOn, To tHe SOveREiGntY Of GOd. Above iT aLl, he reiGns! WHAT HAppeNs iS witH His pErmis­sion, undeR HiS conTRol And paRt of HIs etEr­Nal plAn. God wIll haVe The last word! In thIs coNtext CalvIn sTrEssEd PassaGEs whicH spEak Of God’s sAving puRPosE, oF hIS cHoosing a people in ChRiST BeFore the wOrld beGAn. in VIew of man’S sInfUlneSS All goOd muST sUrely begIn with gOd, caLvin empHaSized. IN tHis Way god reCEiveS all thE glory anD praiSE, whether for man’S Election, regenERaTIOn ANd caLliNg, justifica­Tion, PErseVeraNCe Or fINal glOry. SuReLY nO One can fault this emphAsIs or diSagreE with its essenTial truth.

BUT THat is not To saY ThAT everything CalVin or His followeRS taught wAs equAlly scriPtural and AGReeable. LIke Us aLl, tHey WANtEd to harmonize BIBlicAl TeachinG, to Make a siNglE piCtuRe, tO fIt the piecEs togethEr. thEy SeEmeD to beGIn with twO pIecEs: Man’S sinfULness aNd inaBiliTy, AnD god’S holineSS aND PoweR. AS tHey sTudIeD the SCripTUreS, they puT the other ParTS togEtHeR around These. Even the mOsT com­mitted caLviNists aDMIt that soMe pieces do not seem to fit. THEre are gAps In the Pic­tUre. Some paRts Even loOk lIKe they Belong To a diFfEreNT PuzzlE. bUt The PiCture as a whOLE maKes so MuCh seNse, and sO very many of the piecES apPear to fit this Pat­Tern, THAt calVInISts MaRK up THE rest to human misUnderstandInG Or Divine sileNCe.

WItH time, soMe “ReforMed” beLIevers bEcame discOntented wItH thiS ARraNge­ment. The Gaps were Too gaping TO suit THeM; the pIle Of “left-OvEr” pIeces Was too LArgE. They Began tO rEarranGe the PaRts, intenDing to keep the same truth
 need to grow in their und er-standin g, to  ga inalarg er a nd truer persp e ctiv e from which to better  view  t h e tr u th  they  alread y  k n o w.
T wo  Po pu l ar  View s:Origina l and Corr upt ed 

On the One Ha nd... When eve r we talk ab out  the “ Ca lvi n ist”or“Armi nian”v iew, w e need to  d i stingu i sh betw e e ntheclassical doctrin e sa nd their later  popul ar co r r upt ion s.

Whilest ill i n  his th i rt i e s , J o hn Calvin wro te his Inst i tut es ofth e C h ristia n Rel i­ g ion , which hededi cated in1534 t o  the ki n g of Fr ance o n b eha lf o f  p er sec ut e d R e ­f orm e d C hristian sin  that  cou n t r y . Li kePete r, Pa ul and John,Cal vint urn ed, i n the  sto rm  of o ppress ion a nd  affliction, to  the  sovereig nty  o f G od . Abo v e it a ll,  He  reigns ! Whath app en s i swith His permis­si on , un der Hiscontro l  a nd part ofHi s e ter­ n a l pla n. G o dwill hav e thel as tword! I nthis c on tex t C alvin stre ssed p assageswhich speak of God’s saving purpos e ,o f  H i s ch oos ing a peopl e in Chri st b e fo ret he wo rld b eg a n. In view of man’s si nf ulness  allgood must sur ely beginw i t h God, C alvi n  e m phasized. In t his w ay God rec e ives all  theglory an d praise, w hether f orman ’sele c t io n, regenerati o n  and  c alling,  ju stifica ­ti on,  pe rse ve rance orfinal gl or y.  S ur ely  no o n e can fa ul t t hi s e mphas i s or d isagr ee w it hi tsessenti a lt r uth. 
Bu t th atis  notto s a y t hat eve rything C alv i n or  h is  follow ers taught wa sequally sc ri ptu ral an d agreeabl e. Like us all, they wa n ted tohar moniz e bi blical te ach ing, t o m a ke a s inglepictu re , t o fit t h e  p iec es  together. T hey  seem ed  tobegin w ith two pieces: ma n ’ssinfulness an d i nabi l i ty , a n dG od’ sh oli n e ss and power. A s they stu di e dthe Script u res ,they pu t the o therp arts to gether ar ound thes e.  Eve n the  most com­ mitted C alvinists admit th at so mepieces  d o n ot se em tof it.  Ther e arega ps inthe p ic ­ture. S ome parts even look lik e they  belo ngto a diff ere n t p uzzle. Bu t th e pictureasa w holemak e s somuch se nse ,  andso v e ry many o f  t hep i ec es appear t o f itthispat ­ tern,that  Calvinists marku p the rest tohuma n mis und e rsta nd ing or divinesil en c e .

Withti me, some “R eformed”  b e lieve rs bec ame di sconten t e dw ith th is a rra nge­ment.  Th eg aps wer eto o  gapin g to  s uit th em; th e  pil e of “left-over” p ieces w as to o  la rge.Th ey bega n  torearrangethe parts,intend ingto ke ep thesa me tru th
 need_to grow_in their under-standing, to_gain a_larger_and truer_perspective_from which to_better view the_truth they already know.

Two_Popular Views: Original_and_Corrupted

On the One Hand... Whenever we talk about the “Calvinist” or “Arminian” view, we_need_to distinguish_between_the_classical doctrines and their later_popular corruptions.

While still in his_thirties, John_Calvin wrote his Institutes of the Christian Reli­gion,_which_he dedicated in_1534 to the king of France on behalf of_persecuted Re­formed Christians in that country._Like Peter, Paul_and_John,_Calvin turned, in the_storm of oppression and affliction, to_the sovereignty of God. Above it_all, He reigns! What happens is with_His permis­sion, under His control and_part of His eter­nal plan._God will_have the last word! In_this context Calvin_stressed passages_which speak of_God’s saving purpose, of His choosing_a people in_Christ before the world began. In_view_of man’s sinfulness_all_good_must surely_begin with God,_Calvin_emphasized. In_this_way God receives all the glory_and_praise, whether for man’s election, regeneration and_calling, justifica­tion, perseverance or_final_glory. Surely no one_can fault this emphasis or_disagree with its essential truth.

But that_is not_to say_that everything Calvin or his followers taught was equally scriptural and_agreeable. Like us all, they wanted_to harmonize biblical teaching,_to make_a_single picture, to_fit_the pieces_together. They seemed to begin with two_pieces: man’s_sinfulness and inability, and God’s holiness_and power. As they_studied_the Scriptures, they put the other_parts together around these. Even the_most com­mitted Calvinists admit that_some_pieces_do not seem to fit._There are gaps in the pic­ture._Some parts even_look like they belong to a different_puzzle._But the picture as a whole_makes_so much sense, and so very_many_of_the pieces appear to fit_this pat­tern, that Calvinists mark up_the rest to human misunderstanding or divine silence.

With time,_some “Reformed” believers_became discontented with this arrange­ment._The_gaps_were too gaping to suit them; the pile of “left-over”_pieces was_too large. They_began to rearrange the parts, intending to keep the same_truth