In the midst of the Calvinism/Arminianism storm, a few voices of reason have appeared in the Hickory Stump Baptist Association. Pastor Cal Johnson, author of such books as “Total Depravity: A Study of In-Laws,” and “Irresistible Grace and the Boston Red Sox” is leading the charge towards a purer form of Calvinistic teachings.
The key issue on which the pastor has based his appeal? Voting for church membership.
“Anyone who has been predestined to be saved will be saved. Since being a Christian apart from the local church is anti-biblical, it follows that anyone who is predestined to be saved is also predestined to be a part of the local church. Let me ask you something: do we vote on whether or not someone is truly saved? Of course not! And as such, neither should we vote on whether a predestined Christian should be a part of the church. Predestined salvation equals predestined membership.”
Some local pastors object to this church membership approach. Pastor Johnson counts as members anyone who was ever saved or baptized there; membership rolls for the congregation, located in a community of 4,000 people, lists 8,944 names.
While strongly disagreeing with Pastor Johnson on the issue of voting for church membership, earthy crosstown Pastor Buck White is also pushing the envelope in search of the next logical step in Calvinistic theology.
“We still believe the church should vote on membership in the local body. It is this vote and subsequent membership that shows the church’s recognition of the new Christian’s predestined state,” said Pastor White. “However, most churches fail to see the next step. After voting for the inclusion of those predestined for salvation, my church members have the chance to vote for members of the community likely to be predestined for destruction.”
Sofia Prescott moved her membership to Pastor White’s church last spring after hearing his views on so-called “double predestination.”
“I’ve been telling people for years that my worthless son-in-law wouldn’t amount to much more than gasoline-soaked fodder for the fires of hell. Now I’ve got the chance to confirm it by binding church vote.”
All baptized believers who are members of the church are permitted to propose names for the predestined for destruction vote.
Tommy, age 6, was proud of his role in church life: “I was baptized las’ year after the Christmas program. Last Sunday I got to nominate Lisa Farrell, that four-eyed freaky girl in my class, for predestinatited for destruction. If the vote passes, we’ll know she’s gonna burn whether she likes it or not. We get to vote ‘bout it in a week!”
As a way of compromise between the two leaders, Pastor Johnson recently proposed that the two churches come together to discuss voting on destruction provided the discussion is limited to “nations and peoples that are most likely destined for hell.” Johnson’s reasoning was that as long as those nationalities never visit his church, they wouldn’t stand a chance at being predestined for church membership anyway.
Regardless their differing views on the subject of church membership, both Johnson and White are proud to be taking Calvinism to the next level. They represented their association at the annual Calvinism banquet, accepting the Most Calvinistic Association award with smiles and handshakes.
As for what’s next for these visionary pastors, they’re working on a new approach: predestination for church discipline.
You crack me up.
Funny, but twisted. Inflated membership rolls seem so non-Calvinistic. Even Roman, a la Constantine.
Inflated? Surely you jest!
These are legitimate church members, predestined as such.
Funny, but twisted – some would say that this is a good description of Jeremy.
And that’s why I like him so much!!!
“Some would say that this is a good description of Jeremy.”
Who you been talking to?
“Funny, but twisted. Inflated membership rolls seem so non-Calvinistic.”
Are you sure? In Calvin’s Geneva, everyone went to church or the magistrates paid you a call. I suppose we are to assume they were all “elect”. :o)
Reformed theology does not teach that all members of the visible church are elect.
But Calvin and the Reformers baptized those babies just in case! :o)
They baptized said babies because they believed that God had commanded they be under the external administration of the covenant of grace, and were members of the Church by virtue of their parents’ confession.
By virtue of their parents’ profession of faith, rather.
I guess then that the real question, in view of the post, is whether those babies would be members with the right to nomination people destined for destruction.
They would not be allowed to vote until they became communicant members, I’m afraid.
Fabulous answer.
For years, I couldn’t make heads or tails about Calvinism. But today, at last, all that has changed!
Thanks to you, JEREMY, while reading this post I have finally got a real handle on Calvinism. You have produced a post on Calvinism that stops with the incomprehensible theology and instead gives your readers real examples of Calvinists living under the influence.
I think I finally understand what all the fuss is about. 🙂
Glad I could be of service.
This is sure a big difference from the ,” We’ve been found out ” that occurred a time ago. Rather open I’d say – and polite also. Do the women still courtsey down south in the land of cotton ?
” guess then that the real question, in view of the post, is whether those babies would be members with the right to nomination people destined for destruction”
Destruction? You mean like those members who later decided to practice believers baptism? :o)
I’m a Calvinist and I find this to be hilarious. Infralapsarian for the win!
I once had an infralapsarian, but it died so I got a poodle instead.
You can’t baptize with a poodle.
Unless you’re a Presbyterian and don’t need a lot of water.
Dave, this is one of the most hilarious comments I’ve read from you.
Thanks.
Could I super-size my lapsarian? And remember, at this establishment, Servetus-burgers are always well done (even a little burnt).
Jim G.
Jeremy, this reads like a Tominthebox post. I love me some good satire and I enjoy this one.
On a more reflective note, this works as satire because it seems to represent many non-Calvinists’ misunderstanding of Calvinism as taken to a logical extreme. However, this isn’t representative of biblically orthodox Calvinism. The calls for greater discernment in granting church membership to candidates seem to come from Calvinists. It may just be that I read more Calvinists than I do non-Calvinists…
Never heard of Tom In a Box, but he seems gifted.