Calvinism in the Las Vegas Airport

0310231973Richard Mouw's inspiration for the name Calvinism in the Las Vegas Airport came from the film Hardcore, directed by Paul Schrader, an ex-Calvinist. In this film, Schrader presents Jake Van Dorn, a pious Calvinist played by George C. Scott. In one scene, Jake sits in an airport in Las Vegas while trying to track down his daughter, who has gotten involved in the pornography business and is reported to be in Vegas. He has enlisted the help of Niki, a young woman who knows his daughter. As they sit, Niki challenges Jake on what she feels is an exceedingly negative outlook on life. He responds with a dry, irrelevant explanation of TULIP, the five points of Calvinism. Schrader takes this opportunity to poke fun at the tradition he grew up in and to poke fun at his memories of Calvinists.

Dr. Richard Mouw sees the humor in this scene and uses it to springboard a discussion of Calvinism. "I believe that TULIP, properly understood, captures something very central to the gospel. And I want to bring that gospel to Niki and her kind" (14). This book is an examination of Calvinism and an attempt to answer the question, "What does Calvinism have to say to our present world?"

This book is not a detailed examination of Calvinist thought. It is not an apologetic for that system of thought. Rather, it is a series of reflections upon the doctrines known as Calvinism as well as the type of Christian these doctrines seem to produce. Mouw relates much of his story and the experience of people he has met with as he attempts to affirm these doctrines, and yet to challenge those who adhere to them. After spending a chapter providing a primer on the five points, he returns to the doctrine of particular redemption (or limited atonement) and suggests that this is a doctrine that, while true, should be easily shelved for the sake of unity. He does not seek to resolve the tensions that seem to exist in Scripture between a general and a particular atonement. This spirit of what may be either charity or compromise, depending on perspective, foreshadows what is to come.

In a chapter entitled "Not A Stranger," Mouw digs into the issue of suffering. Following the teaching of several Rabbis, he suggests that Christians are permitted to address God in a way that many may feel is irreverent or even blasphemous. "God ordains/permits everything that comes to pass, but we don't simply have to accept that fact. We can complain to God rather vigorously about the things we have a hard time accepting" (51). He concludes this chapter by affirming that God is not a stranger, but a friend. Thus, while we may question Him and His motives, we can take comfort in the fact that it is no stranger we are dealing with.

The next couple of chapters encourage Calvinists to consider not only how they were saved, but what they were saved for. Mouw also examines "Kuyperian" Calvinism (Calvinism influenced by the teaching of Abraham Kuyper).

Chapter eight suggests that Calvinists, rather than focusing on the idea that only a select few will be saved, should believe that the wideness of God's mercy will cause a great multitude to be saved. Unfortunately, this leads him almost into universalism. He discusses a friend, a rabbi, who "because of what he knows about a rather shameful history of Christian persecution of the Jews may not be capable of focusing clearly on the true person of Christ" (90). He believes that his friend will be saved, even if he never turns to Christ in this life. While he is not sure of this, he considers it a hunch, and clearly a firm enough belief that he is willing to publish it. While Mouw declares the importance of Calvinist doctrine, he also downplays theology that is directly opposite to it, for a couple of chapters later, he mentions that, if Niki ever becomes a devout Roman Catholic, that would be okay with him as a Calvinist. He suggests that this understanding of Calvinism that stands opposed to Catholicism is generational and that we can now move past it.

While I applaud Mouw's attempt to reflect upon his theology and to reconcile faith with practice, it seems that he is only too willing to create a type of Calvinism that is in many ways opposed to historic Calvinism. In recent days Dr. Mouw has been influential in a whole new type of ecumenism which attempts to build bridges between even Protestants and Mormons. While building a personalized brand of the Christian faith may be all the rage today, I don't find any biblical warrant for doing so. Truth is truth and error is error. Sadly, Mouw seems to be willing to embrace both.

Comments (8)

1
Anonymous's picture

""God ordains/permits everything that comes to pass, but we don't simply have to accept that fact. We can complain to God rather vigorously about the things we have a hard time accepting" (51). "

I see this type of thinking a lot. Someone in my marriage group said they were angry with God about how their daughter was behaving and her husband said that is it ok to be mad at God, He can take it.

What business do we have being angry at the sovereign creator of the universe? Moses and Job got angry with God and expressed that anger and got put in their place.

I think we should be focusing on rejoicing in the Lord always and not trying to convince ourselves it's ok to be mad at the perfect being who created us and gives us life. Am I crazy for thinking this?

"Truth is truth and error is error."

Sounds good to me Tim.

2
Anonymous's picture

Mouw's views are not surprising considering the fact he's president of Fuller Seminary, a very ecumenical school whose professors, in 1972, voted to remove from the school's statement of faith any affirmation of the inerrancy of Scripture.

3
Anonymous's picture

Dallas,

It is OK to be angry (Be angry, but do not sin), but to be angry at God is a different story...you are fully correct!

As to the post, I think it is sad when we are trying to compromise on doctrines from false relgions and modren "revelations". I was in a wonderful debate over Eldredge the other day where the peron acknoledged there were some not-so-good points after I detailed them (in Wild at Heart) but still suggested that we can learn material from that.

I put up my whole defense statement on my forum:

I am no friend of error and I certainly don't want to compromise with it!

4
Anonymous's picture

Dallas,

It is OK to be angry (Be angry, but do not sin), but to be angry at God is a different story...you are fully correct!

As to the post, I think it is sad when we are trying to compromise on doctrines from false relgions and modren "revelations". I was in a wonderful debate over Eldredge the other day where the peron acknoledged there were some not-so-good points after I detailed them (in Wild at Heart) but still suggested that we can learn material from that.

I put up my whole defense statement on my forum:I am no friend of error and I certainly don't want to compromise with it!

5
Anonymous's picture

Thanks for all of these reviews Tim. This one was especially helpful. You're doing a great job!

6
Anonymous's picture

In his helpful book Deserted by God?, Sinclair Ferguson differentiates between complaining to God and complaining about God. He examines several of the psalms of complaint in which the psalmist complains to God but affirms his trust in God. This is instructive to me in trials.

7
Anonymous's picture

From this review you kind of get a bit of a hint that perhaps Mouw embraces or perhaps thinks he is a bit Calvinistic. Mouw can say some of the things found in this review because he is not a Calvinist, and perhaps I could even venture to say that he is an unbeliever. How in the world can a president of a seminary say that it is appropriate to complain and utter blasphemy against the Holy One. What stupid fool would dare say such a thing? There are unbelievers who know better! I cannot call Mr. Mouw a brother or a Christian. May the just judge of the universe have mercy toward and grant repentance toward such a man. Not only is he leading minds in and into error, but he is also preaching another gospel which in reality is no gospel.

8
Anonymous's picture

Alberto,

We must be careful in judging what we cannot judge. Only God can know this man's heart. Biblically we are called to judge some things, (Jesus says to not cast your pearls before swine. How can we know who the swine are without judging.) but the salvation of others is not one of those things. We can judge that what they are saying is wrong and argue those points biblically, but we must be careful even here. Remember that we may find many places were we are wrong when we get to glory. It is important to pray for Mouw and engage him and others with the same beliefs in discussion we must never judge too lightly anyones salvation. We may question their salvation but not with definate authority that only God has.