Woke Calvinism

The woke is just more Calvinism.  I’ve been saying for quite some time that the woke assumption is that certain folks (generally white people) are characterized by totally depravity and irredeemable. The woke hold the soul/body dichotomy (tranz, gheys) and as such revile the body. “Body positivity” is in fact reviling the body.

They have their own puritanical code. Etc.  My friend Chris Kleinfelter put a finer point on it:

Total Depravity = everybody is racist, sexist, ageist, differently ableist, etc.

Unconditional election = you are not woke by choice but by the appointment of the woke elite (see above).

Limited Atonement = forgiveness for sins does not extend certain behaviors (racist speech in distant past, Trumpism, investing in non-green enterprises, harmingsea turtles).

Irresistible Grace = If the elite (see above) bestow redemption upon you it cannot be refused but I wouldn’t hold my breathe because few are forgiven.

Preservation of the Saints =AOC will not lose any who had been given to her by the elite (see above). They give eternal celebrity to them so they will never lose their Facebook accounts, and those who leave the faith where never woke to begin with.

Yep, not only is wokism the new Calvinism, it’s actually the continuation and natural conclusion of it.

11 thoughts on “Woke Calvinism”

  1. George Christiansen

    For starters: Apartheid stemmed directly from devout and consistent Calvinists, specifically the writings of Abraham Kuyper. I’m not really one myself, but their ideas about sovereignty are the antithesis of woke-ness.

    If you are a 70 IQ, low impulse control, descendant of murderous Zulus it is because God made you that way. You have certain opportunities to excel to whatever degree your efforts and the opportunities divine providence provide, but they will not make rules out of the exceptions. They also will not actively mistreat you, but you will not be granted access to what you and yours cannot handle and did not build.

    Beyond that general point, Calvinist don’t hold to any soul/body dichotomy or any other sort of gnostic anti-matter view. Of course there are exceptions (although I have honestly never met one personally), but I have run into far more of that type among Catholics and Arminian type Evangelicals.

    Totally depravity has zero to do with groups. Everyone suffers from it. The difference is of degree and area of specific expression.

    The idea of the irredeemable is considered Hyper-Calvinism/Double Predestination, which is considered heresy among the Calvinists I know.

    Straight up Calvinism teaches that anyone could be saved, but the damned won’t be saved because they willfully choose not to repent. The elect would be those who God steps in and miraculously changes first and thus they repent. The damned are not prevented from repenting by God, they are simply not given the special grace needed to overcome themselves. The type of sin that gets you damned is pretty much irrelevant, aside from the sin of choosing autonomy/lawlessness over dependence upon God.

    I’m not endorsing any of this per se, but it has zero to do with woke-ness and all of the actual Calvinists I follow and know personally (I read and watch Douglas Wilson regularly and have a decent amount of friends who are Orthodox Presbyterian types) fall on the anti-woke side of things. And the woke versions of Presbyterians and such rarely qualify as Christian, let alone Calvinist. They about as good an example of Calvinism as gay female priests are of Catholicism.

    1. The views on free-will alone lead to wokeness.

      You’re conflating whether Douglas Wilson or whatever is woke or would allow it for the natural conclusion from Calvinism that wokeness is.

      We are in the midst of a new, emerging apartheid state enforced by the woke.

      The puritanical calvinists absolutely mortified the body and saw the body as an obstacle to their absolution, just as the trannies.

      Calvin said man was totally depraved from eternity past, I don’t care what modern “Calvinist” takes are. There is a thread from Calvin directly to the vilification of certain groups, white, male, Christians, as totally evil and irredeemable.

      Some are allowed to repent and join the woke ranks.

      The fork in the family tree occurs in New England in the 1730’s or so, leads through the abolitionists, suffragettes, the Marcusians, and now the woke masses.

      Gudem or whichever modern Calvinist is a different problem sharing the same genealogy.

    2. Not meant to be a literal parallel of Calvin’s theology it is rather a take-off of the tulip acrostic as seen in many traditional protestant hero-worship regurgitations over too many centuries. I meant it as a comparison in styles of thought and action that create an oppressive atmosphere used to dictate a particular set of beliefs, as in wokeism, communism, socialism, transgenderism, and no genderism. They promulgate it as the only proper mainstream ideal just as I have heard Calvinism screamed from 69 years’ worth of pulpits often with it not being labeled as such. They called it the gospel. They stuck a “one-way” finger in the air then pointed it accusingly at gentle seekers undeserving of their scorn. “forgive them, know not what they do?” Just maybe they set an example for those who would create a new political gospel every bit as unforgiving as the old one. I realize that many protestant sects are self-styled 4 point or 3 point Calvinists or just generally free-range congregants at the buffet of Christian modernity. I think you may have dived a bit too deep. Come up a little closer to the surface where the pressure isn’t so heavy.

  2. George Christiansen

    You are wrong on pretty much every point you just wrote.

    Your opinion is so obviously based on caricatures vs actually reading Calvin or the Puritans.

    You simply don’t know what you are talking about here.

  3. I consider myself a Calvinist and think our disagreement would start with your understanding of Total Depravity. My understanding of it is a ‘righteousness as filthy rags’ problem. A vertical evil problem, not a horizontal one.

  4. Pingback: Calvinists don’t understand – ScottHambrick.com

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.

Scroll to Top