Grudem's Phoenix Seminary produces rabid anti-Calvinist?

[Ron Henzel]

Has anyone heard of Micah Coate, or his new book, A Cultish Side of Calvinism?

View attachment 2200​

It appears to be a self-published work (apparently POD), through an outfit called Innovo Publishing.

From his Facebook page Coate appears to be a thirty-something youth pastor with an M.Div. from Phoenix Seminary serving at the Vineyard Community Church in Tucson. The portion of his book you can read on Amazon contains the following disclaimer:

The views within this book are the personal thoughts and reflections of the author and are not necessarily representative of the present church at which he serves.

His web site is poorly designed difficult to navigate. Through trial and error I learned that you have to locate a frame, click on it, and then use the page-up/down keys to scroll down for more text. I have found arrow keys to be useless in three different browsers. And even then the page up/down keys can skip over a lot of text. Hence the only way to read all of it is to open up the source code page. The "About" tab contains the following text; I had to guess at where the paragraph breaks were in the middle of it:

A Cultish Side of Calvinism was first written for the purpose of clarifying Calvinistic theology, but Coate's research led him to the conclusion that it shares significant similarities to unorthodox Christian faiths.

Coate's scrutiny will prove to be biblically balanced and practically engaging for anyone remotely interested in Christian theology. As a pastor, speaker, and hospital chaplain, Micah has experienced first hand Calvinism's effect in Christian culture. He clearly writes how you can beware the pitfalls of Calvinism's overly systematized theology.

If the rise of a cultish theology grows within Christendom, so must a true discernment of its claims and consequences. The same standard that has placed Mormons, Jehovahs Witnesses, and Scientologists outside the Christian camp of orthodoxy has now, for the first time, placed the theology of Calvinism as being too cultish for comfort.

Unlike any other book on the market, A Cultish Side of Calvinism not only shows that the theology of Calvinism is more systematic than biblical, but that it is comparable to almost any classic Christian cult. Most people know that Evangelical Christianity has rightly denounced theologies that differ in the essentials of the faith. Yet, due to its foothold on Christian 'orthodoxy', the theology of Calvinism has mainly gone unnoticed, leaving many young Christians unaware of the veiled and yet essential claims of their new found theology.

The September 2006 issue of Christianity Today sums up the previous claims that Calvinism is growing among a new generation of Christians. The story's very title says it all: "Young, Restless, Reformed, Calvinism is making a comeback - and shaking up the church." If the claims of this book go unchecked and Calvinism is indeed "shaking up the church", we should fear that it will tragically break up the body of Christ even further.

His all-out assault on Calvinism begins in his preface, where he writes:

First and most importantly, as we will discover in this book, the philosophy and theology of Calvinism are not, in fact, trivial diversities in belief and interpretation of God's Word but are monumental truth claims that pose a great threat to orthodox Christianity.

He obviously has no problem with placing Calvinism on a par with Mormonism, Scientology, and Jehovah's Witnesses, which should make one wonder why he would work in a church that doesn't see Calvinism in those same terms.

The book bears about a dozen endorsements, with Arminian Tim LaHaye at the top of the list, followed by Earl Radmacher and Paige Patterson. One endorsement comes from Fred Chay, billed as an associate prof of theological and biblical studies at Phoenix Seminary.


Ron Henzel, Ruling Elder
Evangelical Presbyterian Church (PCA)
Cape Coral, FL
epchurch.net
readingscripture.org

 

[GulfCoast Presbyterian]

Perhaps Paige Patterson's "good friend" Al Mohler will write a review. Tim LaHaye is just oozing credibility, too. How many decades past his "end of the world" date are we???

---------- Post added at 07:50 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:41 AM ----------

The author has a facebook page hawking his book here: A Cultish Side of Calvinism | Facebook

 

[Jack K]

One guy's rant coupled with some vanity publishing. Yawn.

 

[DMcFadden]

You gotta wonder if he skipped taking Grudem in favor of other profs or just slept through the classes.

On a broader front, it is not difficult to find fault with the "ugly underbelly" of Calvinism . . . or Arminianism . . . Pentecostalism . . . Roman Catholicism . . . Democrats . . . Republicans . . . Tea Party supporters . . . Rotarians . . . or the PTA. The odd, quirky, hypocritical, judgmental adherents of EVERY belief system or affinity group "make the group look bad." I'm with Jack. Yawn.

 

[Pergamum]

Has anyone read it, and can they review it..preferably AFTER they read it on here?

 

[NB3K]

Maybe we all should urge Grudem to do a polemical against his former student like Calvin did to his.

I have found that the anti-calvinists as they are called are more cultish.

 

[Edward]

His web site is poorly designed difficult to navigate. Through trial and error I learned that you have to locate a frame, click on it, and then use the page-up/down keys to scroll down for more text.

While I agree that it is a poorly done 'flash-happy' site, I could view the text by grabbing the scroll bar and sliding it up and down.

If this is an example of his writing, the book may well be unreadable:

"If the claims of this book go unchecked and Calvinism is indeed "shaking up the church", we should fear that it will tragically break up the body of Christ even further."

I have to wonder if he really wants to say what he is saying there. He seems to be refuting his own writing. At least it saves us the effort of doing so.

 

[CharlieJ]

I think the best course of action is to ignore it completely. A vanity press publication doesn't deserve thorough reading or response. There's too much other stuff to do. If you have close personal friends or family members affected by it, then perhaps you need to pay attention to it. Otherwise, it's just one more book hardly anyone will read, and I don't think people of Grudem's caliber need to get distracted with things like this.

 

[elnwood]

Two thoughts:

1) Cults are known for things like sectarianism, believing that they are the only true church, and that only they are the ones going to heaven. I've known Calvinists who believe that "Calvinism is the gospel," that non-Calvinists are not saved, and that only Reformed churches are true churches. I'd be hard-pressed to deny that Calvinists don't have "cult-like" tendencies. Many fundamentalists also have these "cult-like" tendencies.

2) The notion that Calvinism is a threat to orthodoxy is ridiculous. Divine sovereign election has been taught in the church throughout church history, both before and after the Reformation era. Even today, when most evangelical churches are not Calvinist, most Biblical scholars favor Calvinistic interpretations of Scripture. There's no way you can say Calvinism is threatening orthodoxy without having a historically short-sighted view of what Christian orthodoxy is.

 

[Bill The Baptist]

Regardless of what we think of this book, it is not neccesarily a reflection of Grudem or his seminary. There are plenty of Calvinists who graduated from Arminian schools (like me),and yet no one is accusing those schools of being Calvinist.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

It is kind of an odd title for a thread. It implies the Seminary is responsible for this fellow's unstable theology.

From his Facebook page Coate appears to be a thirty-something youth pastor with an M.Div. from Phoenix Seminary serving at the Vineyard Community Church in Tucson.

Enough said.

 

[Ron Henzel]

His web site is poorly designed difficult to navigate. Through trial and error I learned that you have to locate a frame, click on it, and then use the page-up/down keys to scroll down for more text.

While I agree that it is a poorly done 'flash-happy' site, I could view the text by grabbing the scroll bar and sliding it up and down.

If this is an example of his writing, the book may well be unreadable:

"If the claims of this book go unchecked and Calvinism is indeed "shaking up the church", we should fear that it will tragically break up the body of Christ even further."

I have to wonder if he really wants to say what he is saying there. He seems to be refuting his own writing. At least it saves us the effort of doing so.

Edward,

Thanks for showing me how use the site's scroll device. Needless to say, I did not find it very intuitive. I think I was trying to click on each little, thinking that would do something.

As for the book's readability, you can sample it via the preview feature on Amazon.com. I didn't have time to read it thoroughly enough to determine whether he had adequate editorial help, which most writers need these days.


Ron Henzel, Ruling Elder
Evangelical Presbyterian Church (PCA)
Cape Coral, FL
epchurch.net
readingscripture.org

 

[Ron Henzel]

It is kind of an odd title for a thread. It implies the Seminary is responsible for this fellow's unstable theology.

From his Facebook page Coate appears to be a thirty-something youth pastor with an M.Div. from Phoenix Seminary serving at the Vineyard Community Church in Tucson.

Enough said.

Rich,

I understand what you're saying, but please note the final sentence in my original post:

One endorsement comes from Fred Chay, billed as an associate prof of theological and biblical studies at Phoenix Seminary.

It's one thing to produce a graduate who publishes an embarrassing repudiation of your seminary's views. It's happened before, as when Gary D. Long published his defense of limited atonement to the chagrin of his alma mater, Dallas Theological Seminary. But to have one on your list of resident faculty? It raises the question of whether Phoenix Seminary actually has an institutional position on Calvinism.

On the other hand, the problematic endorsement comes off as quite a bit more less than ringing:

Theological traditions are the tramway of intellectual transportation and result in spiritual transformation. Theological traditions are mediated through a theologian's own theoretical and ideological assumptions. However, traditions and assumptions are not to be assimilated automatically nor accepted uncritically. This book does neither.

Uhm, OK. I suppose the best that can be said about that is that it doesn't have anything negative to say whatsoever about Coate's book. And one might speculate that, as Grudem's colleague, Fred Chay, was being very careful. Chay, by the way, has two degrees from Dallas Theological Seminary, and his personal web site, GraceLine, positions him as a Dispensationalist and features a link to a video interview with Charles Ryrie.


Ron Henzel, Ruling Elder
Evangelical Presbyterian Church (PCA)
Cape Coral, FL
epchurch.net
readingscripture.org

 

[Edward]

As for the book's readability, you can sample it via the preview feature on Amazon.com.

Thanks. It does look like it's been through the editorial process. His so-called "Apostle's Creed' made me flinch. He took fewer liberties with the Nicene.

It doesn't appear to be a profitable use of my time to read through the excerpt.

 

[Poimen]

As one who purports to teach and understand "Evangelical Christianity" he certainly cannot be considered an expert or well-trained as he rejects the theology of all the original evangelicals (of the 16th century).

 

[GulfCoast Presbyterian]

As one who purports to teach and understand "Evangelical Christianity" he certainly cannot be considered an expert or well-trained as he rejects the theology of all the original evangelicals (of the 16th century).

I believe C.S. Lewis called this "chronological snobbery."

 

[elnwood]

I understand what you're saying, but please note the final sentence in my original post:

One endorsement comes from Fred Chay, billed as an associate prof of theological and biblical studies at Phoenix Seminary.

It's one thing to produce a graduate who publishes an embarrassing repudiation of your seminary's views. It's happened before, as when Gary D. Long published his defense of limited atonement to the chagrin of his alma mater, Dallas Theological Seminary. But to have one on your list of resident faculty? It raises the question of whether Phoenix Seminary actually has an institutional position on Calvinism.

Actually, it answers that question. Both Chay and Grudem are on residential faculty, so clearly they don't have an institutional position on Calvinism. There are lots of major evangelical seminaries that don't take an institutional position on Calvinism and have prominent professors that take opposing positions on the issue, including all the Southern Baptist seminaries, Beeson, TEDS, Gordon-Conwell, etc.

Where did you get the idea that Phoenix Seminary took an institutional position on Calvinism, such that Chay's comments were a repudiation of it?

 

[Ron Henzel]

Where did you get the idea that Phoenix Seminary took an institutional position on Calvinism, such that Chay's comments were a repudiation of it?

I was never sure that it did. But the fact that Wayne Grudem is featured prominently on the seminary's web site, that he is well known for attempting a fusion of Calvinist and charismatic theologies—particularly Vineyard Movement theology—and that Coate is both a Phoenix grad and a Vineyard minister, seems to present something of an analogy to situations in which alum have done that kind of thing. And I think it must be admitted that attacking the soteriology of the seminary's front man as being "comparable to almost any classic Christian cult" and "a great threat to orthodox Christianity" constitutes a very hard slam against the seminary itself, albeit an indirect one. At minimum it's a strong repudiation of the seminary's spiritual and theological discernment.

Ron Henzel, Ruling Elder
Evangelical Presbyterian Church (PCA)
Cape Coral, FL
epchurch.net
readingscripture.org

 

[Hebrew Student]

A Cultish Side of Calvinism

A book has come out [or is about to come out] called A Cultish Side of Calvinism by a Micah Coate that is endorsed by men such as Dr. Paige Patterson and Dr. C. Gordon Olsen, and it is deeply concerning. It is not that the author's arguments are overly compelling to me, but it is the way in which these arguments are formulated. For example, here is the thesis of his book:

Are there any similarities between Mormonism and Calvinism in regards to their relation to orthodox Christianity? Are there similarities between Jehovah’s Witnesses’ doctrine and Calvinism? Can similarities be found between their leaders and those of Calvinism? Is it possible to find legitimate connections between the world of the cults, and Calvinism? Due to the long history of Catholicism, most people in Christendom at large now know the stark differences between the practicing Catholic and the Protestant Christian. The clear and very notable doctrinal stances held by Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses distinguish them from the orthodox Christian and are quite obvious to those who inquire. However, the same cannot be said of Calvinism. One might assume that this seemingly vagueness of doctrinal differences between the two is because Calvinism is itself orthodox. But, my research reveals otherwise. My purpose in writing this book is not only to show that Calvinism is unorthodox, but that it has a potential of sharing characteristics of a classic Christian cult.

In other words, he is not just arguing that Calvinism is unorthodox, but that it is a cult such as Mormonism or the Jehovah's Witnesses.

However, there are some other really disturbing things about this book. Aside from the hermeneutical issues that the author, Mr. Coate, has, there is this constant strawman argumentation. For example, here is how he says you can tell a true Calvinist who knows what he believes, from one who does not:

Before we take a closer look at the five points of TULIP, I have found a very simple test for determining whether one is a true Calvinist or just a Calvinist by association. The question to ask a potential Calvinist is this: “Do you believe that you will be save or damned for all of eternity because you were saved or damned from all eternity?” If the person answers “no,” one can assume that he knows little or nothing of the essential elements of Calvinistic doctrine. If he responds “yes,” one can conclude that he understands what he believes. Some of these people, however, insist they are still Reformed. They justify this claim by calling themselves “four-point Calvinists.” We will cover the fallacy of adhering two four-point Calvinism shortly.

Also, note his bold misrepresentation wherein he quotes a poem with one of the stanzas as:

Jesus loves me, I will win!
Cannot fall away by sin.
Can’t resist His grace, it’s true,
Died for me but not for you

Again, these statements are misleading at best, and downright false and slanderous at worst. However, knowing that the accuracy of these statements can be challenged, he writes the following:

It should be noted that non-Calvinist’s definitions of Calvinism are far more accurate than those of the Calvinist. As we have seen, leading Calvinists have been in the practice of revealing only the “good” parts of their doctrine while downplaying the parts that are not.

On the other hand, non-Calvinists, without fear or guilt, can rightly realty both the salvific and damning doctrines of Calvinistic theology.

He also tries to argue from the idea that there are differences in our view of God to say that Calvinism is cultic:

Calvinism critics Walls and Dongell seem to agree, stating in their book, Why I am Not a Calvinist:

To the casual observer, it may appear that there is little if any real different between the two positions. But agreement at the level of broad claims about sovereignty, love, and freedom masks profound disagreements about how these matters are understood in detail…Arminiams and Calvinism represent starkly opposing theological visions, at the heart of which are profoundly different views of God [Italics Mine]

Profoundly different views of God. This is what lies at the heart of the matter-not relatively nontheological issues like styles of music or liturgy but the grave position of holding to different views of God. In the pursuit for truth, amid obstacles and rabbit trails, one should always remember that the heart of the matter is indeed different views of God. These are in fact serious theological differences that separate evangelical Christians from Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and other cults. The biblical picture, knowledge, and revelation of God are at stake! Even R.C. Sproul, the popular Calvinist pastor, clearly states, “Reformed theology…is driven first and foremost by its understanding of the character of God.” This general assertion by Calvinist prompted the title to Dave Hunt’s book, What Love is This? Calvinism’s Misrepresentation of God. Exposure of the biblical inconsistencies within Calvinistic doctrine reveals that Calvin’s God differs from the orthodox, biblical God. Chuck Smith, founder of Calvary Chapel states, “The doctrinal distinctive of Reformed Theology cannot be reconciled with what we know about God from his holy word.” William MacDonald, author of over eighty books, concludes that Calvinism portrays “God in a totally unscriptural manner.” Joseph R. Chambers says, “Calvinism makes our Heavenly Father look like the worst of despots.” It is this Calvinistic painting of God that moved Vance to conclude, “Calvinism is therefore, the greatest ‘Christian’ heresy that has ever plagued the church.

I guess what concerns me is not so much the argumentation, but the men who endorsed this book. Some parts of this book are available to read on Amazon right now for free [just click on the "click to look inside" button]. I have responded to that content on my blog here. The bad argumentation with the endorsements is a big problem. This book isn't just arminianism; it goes well beyond arminianism to say that anyone who questions it is, not just a heretic, but a cultist.

God Bless,
Adam

 

[steadfast7]

Isn't one of the requirements to gain cult-status, that a group deviates from one of foundational and historical tenets of a faith, rather than points of doctrine further up the tree? Which is why we consider JW and Mormons cults but not Roman Catholicism (?). As long as predestination has been affirmed and believed in the history of the confessing church, Calvinism is cleared, no? Afterall, Calvin was merely attempting to realize a revival of Augustinianism. Besides, predestination, as McGrath argues, was not even the centrepiece of Calvin's doctrine anyway.

 

[Ron Henzel]

Isn't one of the requirements to gain cult-status, that a group deviates from one of foundational and historical tenets of a faith, rather than points of doctrine further up the tree? Which is why we consider JW and Mormons cults but not Roman Catholicism (?). As long as predestination has been affirmed and believed in the history of the confessing church, Calvinism is cleared, no? Afterall, Calvin was merely attempting to realize a revival of Augustinianism. Besides, predestination, as McGrath argues, was not even the centrepiece of Calvin's doctrine anyway.

Dennis,

You're quite right. I've been involved with counter-cult ministries on-and-off over the past 30 or more years, and although counter-cult Arminians have occasionally made limited comparisons between Calvinism and cults (Dave Hunt comes to mind here), they are vastly outnumbered by counter-cult apologists (both Arminian and Calvinist) who keep the boundaries of cultism carefully drawn around the denial of the historic doctrines of the Trinity, the sufficiency of Scripture (since most cult leaders set themselves up as having divine authority), and salvation by grace through faith. Therefore most counter-cult ministries will not even define Roman Catholicism as a cult, since it affirms the Trinity, let alone Calvinism.

Coate is attempting to alter the definition of "cult" that is commonly-accepted among evangelicals so that it includes doctrines that have been debated among Christians long before Calvin's time—going back around 16 centuries, in fact. The middle ages was filled with literature by both proponents and opponents of the Augustinian teaching on election who somehow managed to avoid calling into question the Christianity of those with whom they disagreed.

Before Christians spoke of cults, they used the word "heresies." Many medieval heretics, in fact, strongly resembled modern cults in both doctrine and behavior. But Coate needs to keep in mind (or maybe learn for the first time) that it was Pelagius who was condemned as heretical (read: "cultic") by church synods, not Augustine. It was Calvin's and Luther's view of predestination that dominated the Protestant Reformation, not Erasmus's or Arminius's, whose views were ultimately rebuked in Reformed confessions. Coate is not only out of step with the Reformation, but with most of church history.

Coate's book is not only a malicious slander from beginning to end, it's an ignorant one at that. If the word "cult" had been in common currency through most of medieval and early modern church history, it is his view that would have been labeled "cultic." He should be thankful he's not living in those times.


Ron Henzel, Ruling Elder
Evangelical Presbyterian Church (PCA)
Cape Coral, FL
epchurch.net
readingscripture.org

 

[NB3K]

As one who purports to teach and understand "Evangelical Christianity" he certainly cannot be considered an expert or well-trained as he rejects the theology of all the original evangelicals (of the 16th century).

Your right. I wonder how the author would feel if he knew that Luther held to the so-called points of calvinism.

 

[Sviata Nich]

The author is a youth pastor, and when I looked over his facebook - yes I looked at his facebook - he listed Rocky as the person who inspires him. Perhaps its my own judgmental nature, but I have a hard time taking him seriously.

When I look at across the board at the different representatives of the Christian faith, it is hard not admit the Calvinism is quite different.
Roman Catholicism focus' on the churches authority, Eastern Orthodoxy focus' on tradition, Methodism focus' on the sinner and holiness, these new emergent churches seem to care more about fitting in and being "cool" than anything else, but in my mind Calvinism stands alone as the one who's primary focus is on God, on what pleases Him, and His providence and sovereignty.

If that comes across as cultish, either we have not explained ourselves properly or serious questions arise about the one making such a claim. And in this case its difficult not to go with the latter.

 

[elnwood]

I wonder how the author would feel if he knew that Luther held to the so-called points of calvinism.

Luther was no 5-point Calvinist. He taught that regeneration and justification could be lost.
The Perseverance of the Saints: A History of the Doctrine by John Jefferson Davis (1991 JETS)

 

[J. Dean]

This guy sounds like Dave Hunt.

 

[Hebrew Student]

J. Dean,

Ironically, Dave Hunt is one of the people he repeatedly cites, along with Vance and Bryson. I have had many people tell me that these are amongst three of the worst books ever written on the subject.

God Bless,
Adam

---------- Post added at 02:21 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:07 PM ----------

Sviata Nich,

The author is a youth pastor, and when I looked over his facebook - yes I looked at his facebook - he listed Rocky as the person who inspires him. Perhaps its my own judgmental nature, but I have a hard time taking him seriously.

Well, a lot of folks apparently are. Paige Patterson, Olsen, and, although he is more popular than anything, Tim LeHaye. However, what someone told me who was involved in the denomination out of which Patterson and Olsen come was that there is a lot of politics involved in the promotion of this book. Still, with those kinds of names endorsing it, it is disturbing.

As I said before, when I read what was on Amazon, I thought it grossly misleading at best and slanderous at worst. It is absolutely irresponsible for any arminian scholar to endorse such a work.

God Bless,
Adam

 

[Hebrew Student]

Hey Everyone!

For those of you who are interested in this topic, Dr. James White is going to be doing a two hour webcast in which he will deal with this issue today at 3:00PM MST [6:00PM EST]. Here is the link where you can listen live. Dr. White is a very good New Testament scholar and Theologian, and, hopefully he will do just what he said and give this book the burial it so richly deserves.

God Bless,
Adam

 

[extolHIM]

I'm about 1 1/2 hours into the James White broadcast and he's ripping it to shreds. He's pretty much focusing on all the times Coate references White himself in the book. I listen to White's program, The Dividing Line, regularly via podcast...great stuff!

 

[J Miles]

Is the program avalible as a transcript/text form or mp3?

 

[extolHIM]

Here's a link to the show:

http://www.aomin.org/podcasts/20110818.mp3

He did another 1 1/2 hour show today cause he didn't finish everything in the 2 hour program yesterday. I think only the first 30 minutes is finishing up his comments on the book...haven't listened to it yet though. Here's the link for that:

http://www.aomin.org/podcasts/20110819.mp3