What is Calvinism vs Hyper-Calvinism

In this short video I discuss if there is a difference between Calvinism and Hyper-Calvinism. Let's explore what it means to be a real Christian and is there a hyper version of Christianity?

#Calvinism #Christianity #FaithonFire

[PippaMarks]

Short and sweet but right to the point 🥳
Blessing’s Brian 😇🙏🏻

[jameslowrance]

While compact Brian, this teaching still made a very valid point, with a great teaching method! I too never liked the "hyper Calvinism" term. It implies that there is a milder more acceptable version. NO SO! You made this abundantly clear! Blessings, JL 👍

[awesomefacepalm]

Hyper Calvinism is just consistent Calvinism

[DamonNomad]

A "hyper-Calvinist" is just a regular Calvinist who is honest with himself/herself about what Calvinism actually is. They are strikingly similar to the "extremist" Mormon splinter groups who actually defy the law and try to practice what Brigham Young actually taught and which "mainstream" Mormonism was forced to give up either by the government (polygamy) or by overwhelming social pressure (racism).

[Richard_Rz]

I've never met anyone who called themselves a hyper calvinist.

[primeobjective]

Hyper-Calvinists accept their logical implications of their systematic, such as God IS the Author of Evil.

Calvinists reject the logical implications of their systematic.

[mikem]

Brian, you should have titled your video: ‘False Doctrine vs. Hyper-False Doctrine’

[mjsabie]

Hyper Calvinist = consistent Calvinist

[tonyromero]

Yes Brian I’m with you there is no such thing as híper Calvinism

[TimBarr-ep]

Hyper Calvinism and Calvinism throws the Cross of Christ into a Wood Chipper. God is Good through and through with no Darkness in Him at all. We are entering a time in History where you need to KNOW God is NOT to blame for the Evil in the World and because He is good through and through you and I can put all of our confidence in Him who sent His only Son to save All Men.

[LifeOnHoth]

Thanks for this one. I would be interested in hearing your take on The Remnant Radio. Especially some of the latest content there (demons living inside christians). I'm not sure it's wise to trust my own feeling on them. And I also wish more people made sane reviews of their content from a biblical and proper hermeneutics standpoint.

[roberthughes]

I understand your problems with Calvinism. However, I think it is dangerous to present your views in such that Calvinism in of itself is explicitly heretical and not merely heterodox as Calvinists view Armenians. The views of the reformed tradition were held by almost every single one of the protestant reformers in the 1500s and 1600s including Luther (although he denied the aspect of double predestination). All historical protestant traditions besides Methodism and Baptists affirm the sovereignty of God in a manner that you would call Calvinist and attempt to call unbiblical. I understand that many of you very much dislike Calvinism because you think it leads to an improper view of God and that it is unbiblical, and that's okay. But to act as if these people are not trying to view the scriptures through the lens of faith is to radically disconnect yourself from the history of the church which God said the gates of hell shall not prevail against. I myself am a PCA Presbyterian and hold to Reformed and Covenantal theology. There is a massive distinction between hyper-Calvinism and Calvinism that can easily be explained by the difference between the theological views of Ordo Salutis (the order of salvation logically before the creation of the universe), namely infralapsarianism vs supralapsarianism. This debate is not merely as simple as saying "its unbiblical", and I would suggest taking more humility in assessing the views of some of the greatest theologians to ever live and laid the foundations of the very theological traditions you stand to benefit in. Blessing be to you and your ministry in Christ.

[garthreynolds]

(Irresistible grace) every time I hear this term I think of an older brother tactic of forcing you to say ( uncle) more like an oxymoron of love . 😢

[nicolacochran]

I understand what you are saying here, but when I was looking up the question about the difference between Calvinism vs. hyper-Calvinism, I suppose I was looking to understand what Calvinists would mean by this.
John Piper has a good video where he explains it from a Calvinist's perspective.
Basically what he says is that hyper-Calvinism would be where one of the 5 points of Calvinism becomes so heavily emphasized that it silences other clear teachings in Scripture, such as the responsibility of man. John Calvin taught that this was a mystery, how God is fully in control of everything and determining everything that happens and yet man is still responsible, but that both have to be true.
The non-Calvinist would say God is Sovereign and man is also responsible, and the discussion really is what does God's sovereignty mean and to what extent does he exercise His sovereignty.

On the flip side, I've heard Christians who talk about a time when they were "Arminian" and it seems to me like the beliefs they held could be characterized as hyper-Arminianism. Because they believed that the free will of man was so strong and so powerful that God had no control whatsoever over anything that happened, it was all just happening and he couldn't really do anything about what was happening.

So hyper anything is when one point of doctrine becomes so heavily emphasized that other parts of Scripture are ignored or silenced because of that belief.

I definitely get what you are saying though, in that often Calvinism taken to it's logical conclusion can lead to some very unbiblical mentalities where personal responsibilities become denied, for example, in evangelism we shouldn't worry too much about calling people to repentance because if God has chosen this person for salvation, He will make it happen.
Even if that is true, it is disobedient not to act and call people to repentance, and call people to come and believe. (We are told to sow the seed and leave the growth to God).
But a biblical Calvinist might apply Col 1:29 to their evangelical efforts, which means that they don't use God's sovereignty to excuse themselves from the necessity of struggling to do what we are called to do.

Whereas a biblical Arminian would also agree with Col 1:29 saying yes, it's by walking in the Spirit and in His power that I will be able to do anything good. All that I am comes from Him. All the good that I do comes from Him. He created me. My very mind and the ability I have to understand anything or do anything, those things are all from Him. The word is from Him. And I am responsible to respond in faith and make the choices that He is convicting me to make. In other words there is a relationship where He initiates and we respond. He has the power, and we must make the choice to walk in that power, abiding in Him daily.
Randy Alcorn's book "Hand in hand" does a good job of showing that the beliefs of biblical Calvinists and Biblical Arminians are much closer than we are often led to believe.
However, even he I think often mis-characterizes the Arminian beliefs based on an understanding that he used to have when he was "Arminian"
So I have heard Leighton Flowers point that out in reviewing the book and explaining that there are several points where Alcorn does mis-characterize Arminianism in that book, but it's still pretty good at explaining that there is a lot more in common than we may realize.

[a.k.]

I always thought a hyper calvinist was just a calvinist who drank too much caffeine.

[fantasia]

Calvinists are becoming embarrassed by their doctrines, and are trying to wriggle out of them.

[aaronlee]

What about hyper-charismatics vs. charismatics? Neo-pentecostalism vs pentecostalism vs charismatics vs neo-charismatics? Or any other adjectives that people put in front of a belief system? Generally, the adjective is not something just made up, but there for a reason, to distinguish the original from something that's modified. Based on your previous comments, Brian, I think if talking about Christians believing towards the way you do, you would see a big difference from yourself and those out on the fringe. But when you're against something, you (humans in general) tend to lump everyone together. I know you've spoken out against Justin Peters saying that the fringe element of charismatics are mainstream. Likewise, many Calvinists wouldn't be caught dead associating with and giving credit towards hyper-Calvinists.

[EricSmythChrist]

Hyper-Calvinism refers to an extreme form of Calvinist theology, which is a branch of Protestant theology associated with the teachings of John Calvin. While traditional Calvinism emphasizes the sovereignty of God in salvation and the doctrines of grace (often summarized by the acronym TULIP – Total Depravity, Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace, and Perseverance of the Saints), hyper-Calvinism takes these doctrines to an extreme, often distorting or misrepresenting Calvinist principles.

Key features of hyper-Calvinism may include:

1. **Denial of the Free Offer of the Gospel**: Hyper-Calvinists may reject the idea that the gospel should be freely offered to all people. They may believe that the call to repentance and faith is only for the elect.

2. **Limited Evangelism**: Some hyper-Calvinists may be hesitant to engage in evangelism or outreach activities, believing that God will sovereignly save the elect without human involvement.

3. **Deterministic View of Everything**: Hyper-Calvinism can sometimes lead to an overly deterministic view of all aspects of life, minimizing human responsibility.

It's important to note that hyper-Calvinism is considered an extreme and controversial position within the broader Calvinist tradition. Many Calvinists distance themselves from hyper-Calvinist teachings, emphasizing a balance between God's sovereignty and human responsibility, as well as the genuine offer of the gospel to all people.

There is no hyper calvinism... is just consistent calvinism...

[zachariah]

I have serious question i can't figure out. Am I going to heaven because I chose the right thing and my neighbour didn't? Is it my own righteousness that made me choose Christ? Who and what caused me to stop doing drugs and call out to Jesus? i hated Him. Does it depend on my will and exertion and not on God? How do i know if I am truly saved if it isn't by grace? Is God really not as powerful as the scriptures say? Am i suppose to be the all-powerful one that will get all the glory? it doesnt make sense. What is the gospel?