‘Calvinism’ does not have its origin in John Calvin or his teachings. Whence cometh Calvinism then? It is our understanding that this term Calvinism was first used by Lutherans of the 1550’s, of whom were in opposition to the some of the doctrinal deductions that are found in the Institutes of the Christian Religion. However, as the term Calvinism is understood in our time, it not only has its origin within Arminian theology, but it is a most revered weapon used by those of whom embrace the use of derogatory terms as a means of defamation. The modern despiser of the orthodox Christian faith uses Calvinism and Calvinist as derogatory terms. These terms are meant to incite a feeling of hatred towards all the men of God of whom the doctrines of grace are essential to their understanding of God’s plan of salvation. This includes not just the god-fearing men who have expounded these doctrines from the 16th century until this very present day, but it also includes that great and godly saint Augustine of Hippo (AD 354-430), of whom God used greatly in bringing many of these doctrines, and so much more that is contained in the faith, into the light of His Scriptural truth for all to be illuminated by; it is a light that has never and can never be put out, for, it is the light of God Himself, and Scripture and history bear witness to its truth and providence in the church.
In 1618 and 1619 the Dutch Reformed Church, in what is known as the 2nd Synod of Dort, held 154 meetings and invited eight other Reformed churches as well , to hear and answer the Arminians and their claims that were recorded in their document called ‘The Remonstrance of 1610’. In that document the Arminians put forth their theology — conditional election, unlimited atonement, resistible grace, ability to fall from grace, and, ultimately, man’s ability to choose God’s salvation; which means that they believe man can please God in their unregenerate fallen state. These doctrines were considered over a six month span by all of these men; when they heard all the arguments, they all voted as to how Arminianism should be viewed. The result was that Arminianism was deemed a false doctrine and that they were guilty of political treason, as there was a concern that the Arminians were working for the king of Spain, who was a Roman Catholic under papal rule and authority. And, since the Roman Catholic Church was very active in what is known as the ‘Counter Reformation’, led by the Jesuit order and founded by Ignatius Loyola in AD 1540 for the soul purpose of fighting against the Reformation, it is not far fetched to believe that the Arminian movement in Holland was a product of their evil intentions against the truth of God’s given light that illuminated the Reformation; after all, Arminianism is, for all intents and purposes, a form of Romanism.
Jacob Arminius did spend some time in Rome and there is some suspicion as to how he was able to ascend through the religious ranks within the Dutch Reformed Church. He was vetted by very reformed and orthodox men, and yet, he was still able to reach a position of teaching influence within their university at Leiden; he taught theology, wrote books, and influenced others from within the Dutch Reformed church; this form of educational insurrection is something that the Jesuit order has been perfecting since their conception in the 16th century, and something of which it is certain that they continue in to this day. “Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made.” (Gen 3:1)
So, before the term ‘Calvinism’ was ever coined, John Calvin, his teachings and the other Reformers who have helped to shape the orthodoxy of which we now possess, were stuck out against by these opponents of this light. These negative responses against the doctrines of grace by these 17th century Arminians, known as Remonstrants, were against a mere five of the myriad of doctrines of which John Calvin expounded in that great and seminal Protestant systematic theology called ‘The Institutes of the Christian Religion’. But, these five doctrines, also known as the doctrines of grace, are the heart of Protestant Reformed faith and evangelicalism as we know it. So, to strike at these doctrines is to try to murder what God has done by the men of His raising up in the Reformation.
As we have stated earlier, these five particular doctrines, nor any of the doctrines in ‘the Institutes’, originate with Calvin; they originate in Scripture. For, it is from Scripture alone by which Calvin drew his conclusions and worked them out in a deductive manner; he also carefully compared his conclusions to the teachings of the previous 14 centuries, and where he disagreed with the church fathers he expertly and deductively showed why. John Calvin taught the entire council of God, this is plainly witnessed by the content of his Institutes. Therefore, these five doctrines, of which the most radical of modern Arminians seems so obsessed with, more clearly define Arminian theology as opposed to the doctrines of which Calvin expounded. Also, these five doctrines, which were first called by the acronym TULIP in the 20th century, have been taught by every orthodox Christian teacher since Calvin, and again, they are not taught on their own as an island, but as five contributing parts of the entirety of Christian doctrine; the very same doctrines that Jude says we are to contend for.
All the doctrines of Scripture work systematically, the five doctrines of TULIP cannot survive on their own, but they thrive within the context of the other one hundred or more doctrines. A theology that does not contain the five of TULIP cannot survive on its own, and this has been shown to be true by all theologies that remain outside of orthodox theology, they are all heterodox that do not contain all of these five.
And, Arminianism may well be the chief of all heterodoxy, as Arminianism and Popery are seemingly from the same genetic seed, the seed of the serpent who said to Eve “Hath God said?”. And, in the case of the Arminian, it may be more likely stated, “Hath God truly elected some and not others, hath He the right to do with His creation as He wills, hath He really by His gospel the power unto salvation, is man really bound to Satan in their fallen state, can man not make up his own mind as to wether he wants to believe God is the God of mercy, is man not a living soul and able to please God?”
Also, we should note that, anything with an ‘ism’ attached to the end of it is generally considered wrong. At the core of the the word where the ‘ism’ is attached there may be no error, but once the ism is attached there is a contextual change that happens to the word itself; ‘isms’ are usually associated with error, false teaching, and bigotry. For an example take the word ‘patriot’, there is nothing intrinsically wrong with supporting the country in which we live and to fight against enemy invaders, in fact we are biblically bound to do so; but when being a patriot, one willing to defend his country, turns into patriotism, where one believes ones country can do no wrong, a person enters into the realm of idolatry; and we are strictly forbidden from such behaviour, as it is not Christian but pagan. So too, in the case of Calvinism, we must examine those who would claim to be Calvinists for the tell tale signs of idolatry; there are very many who would put John Calvin before us as a pope. And, as anyone who has actually read Calvin would know, he would never have anything of it!
The actual term Calvinism will not commonly be found amongst those of whom the world would identify as being Calvinist in their theologies and writings, at least not before the 20th century. How common has it become for those who hold to a certain position, and one that is of eternal truth no less, and then allow the terminology of the opposition to become the defining terms of that position. So, anyone who is in the orthodox faith should never use this term ‘Calvinism’, for doing so places it and you in a position of weakness, and so the devil’s desires are satiated when you do so. Let the Arminian practice Arminianism, but let us of orthodox faith be like John Calvin in this way— let us be evangelical.
Scripture Alone 