What if the way we imagine God quietly trains us in how we treat the people closest to us?

Posting this does not mean I agree with every theological conclusion in the video, but the belief-to-behavior connection it highlights is worth wrestling with. The transcript shows how certain Calvinist assumptions about God’s character especially the idea that forgiveness must wait for wrath to be appeased or justice to be satisfied can shape how people relate to one another in everyday life. The speaker describes becoming an angry, withholding father because he believed holiness required conditional mercy, even though Scripture calls us to forgive as God forgave us in Christ (Ephesians 4:32), to bear with one another and forgive freely (Colossians 3:13), and to imitate God as beloved children (Ephesians 5:1). Jesus’ commands to be merciful as your Father is merciful (Luke 6:36) and perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect (Matthew 5:48) press theology into relationships. The point here is not agreement on every doctrine, but the reminder that what we believe about God inevitably shapes how we love, forgive, and live with others.

It does look like this individual understands Calvinism, or at least the mainstream Reformed framework he is critiquing. The purpose here is not to claim perfect agreement with every characterization, but to note that his argument appears to engage recognizable Calvinist doctrines as they are commonly taught and absorbed. What he is doing seems less like attacking an exaggerated version of Calvinism and more like tracing how its core commitments can plausibly shape lived relationships.

His critique is informed by Reformed authorities themselves. By naming figures like John Piper, RC Sproul, John MacArthur, and quoting Jonathan Edwards directly “The bow of God’s wrath is bent…” he demonstrates engagement with voices that have significantly shaped Calvinist theology and piety, rather than relying on caricatures or fringe examples.

Taken together, it seems reasonable to say this critique is attempting to follow Calvinism’s own logic through to its relational effects. If this is even a plausible account of how these doctrines can function when lived out, it raises a fair question for Calvinist readers: not merely whether the system is coherent on paper, but whether the kind of relational posture it can foster truly reflects the Father revealed by Jesus. Is that possibility worth sitting with for a moment?