Calvinism is a Cult

[Mjh29]

Yes... This is in part what I was getting at!

Great post all around! I will have a look at the myths link you posted. Its been a while since I looked at all this stuff so I will be anxious to read it so I don't fall into the same traps.

What Calvin wouldn't recognize is what is called hyper-calvinism. Totally different belief

 

[Naomi25]

Yes... This is in part what I was getting at!

Great post all around! I will have a look at the myths link you posted. Its been a while since I looked at all this stuff so I will be anxious to read it so I don't fall into the same traps.

It was a good article, I thought. I think too often people throw labels around "Calvinist", like it defines who we are as Christians. And, sure, perhaps it helps narrow the field as to where we sit theologically, but to my mind it tears away what should be of primary importance....that we are to be people of the Word, first and foremost. If Calvin's ideas, or Luthers or whoever's, can be shown biblically to support a Christ centric, Sovereign God, then we embrace it, or parts of it. If not, we dismiss it or learn from it as we compare their errors to scripture.
The very huge problem I have with people attacking Calvinism is twofold: mostly, they attack the 'calvinism' that has been proped up on false understanding and then, they usually fling out big claims like "how could a 'loving' God damn people to hell? That does't sound like the God of the bible"....without ever actually providing scriptural basis for this 'God'. If it can be proven, without a doubt, that God does not predestine, choose or elect before time, some and not others, I would hope that theories would be presented with scriptural backing, rather than arguments based, illogically, on feeling. Especially when we find, repeatedly, this 'predestination' language in scripture.

 

[Mjh29]

It was a good article, I thought. I think too often people throw labels around "Calvinist", like it defines who we are as Christians. And, sure, perhaps it helps narrow the field as to where we sit theologically, but to my mind it tears away what should be of primary importance....that we are to be people of the Word, first and foremost. If Calvin's ideas, or Luthers or whoever's, can be shown biblically to support a Christ centric, Sovereign God, then we embrace it, or parts of it. If not, we dismiss it or learn from it as we compare their errors to scripture.
The very huge problem I have with people attacking Calvinism is twofold: mostly, they attack the 'calvinism' that has been proped up on false understanding and then, they usually fling out big claims like "how could a 'loving' God damn people to hell? That does't sound like the God of the bible"....without ever actually providing scriptural basis for this 'God'. If it can be proven, without a doubt, that God does not predestine, choose or elect before time, some and not others, I would hope that theories would be presented with scriptural backing, rather than arguments based, illogically, on feeling. Especially when we find, repeatedly, this 'predestination' language in scripture.

Amen!

 

[Enoch111]

I would hope that theories would be presented with scriptural backing, rather than arguments based, illogically, on feeling. Especially when we find, repeatedly, this 'predestination' language in scripture.

That was already addressed by myself several times (which you probably ignored or missed). Predestination is in order to be conformed to the image of His Son -- perfected and glorified. Which means that those who were seen by God (through divine foreknowledge) to be justified, were also predestined to be perfected.

For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified. (Rom 8:29,30)

1 JOHN 3 (WE SHALL BE LIKE HIM)
1 Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not.

2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.

3 And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure.

Yet that passage in Romans is repeatedly misrepresented to mean that God predestines some for salvation and others for damnation. And that is why Calvinism is damnable doctrine.

 

[Anthony D'Arienzo]

I have been very upfront about how I am not here seeking Truth about God- for that I go to scripture, not forum posts.
I am asking what you believe because I am interested in the truth of what Anthony believes- which does require Anthony to use Anthony's words.
I'm sorry if me being factual and trying to honestly understand Anthony's beliefs is offensive to you and warrants insulting.

I have not insulted you at all
The links I offered had much scripture. If you do not want to learn from them, I cannot be of any help to you.
I am about scripture, not opinions and feelings.

 

[Anthony D'Arienzo]

If indeed this insidious distortion of the Gospel was from Jesus, the Apostles, and the Prophets, the majority of Christians would not be totally against it. Five Point Calvinism is purely A MAN MADE DOCTRINE, and I have already shown that from Scripture.

You have not shown anything but a handful of verses put of context, some wrong definitions, and the usual inaccurate caricatures and statement.
You cannot work through the.posts and demonstrate your point of view.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

I have not insulted you at all
The links I offered had much scripture. If you do not want to learn from them, I cannot be of any help to you.
I am about scripture, not opinions and feelings.

You totally ignored everything in my post.

 

[Anthony D'Arienzo]

I will be more than happy to challenge you on that because you are not going to find TULIP, the 5 points or OSAS listed in his works. He did write about such things here and there but he didn't say, "Here are my 5 points".

He wrote commentaries on books of the Bible where he went verse by verse and discussed the Bible. Thus he taught on all the Bible. Yet, the fall of Adam and Eve aren't part of Calvinism, are they? He was (as far as I know) was the first to say grace isn't a license to sin (yea... Mind blowing, huh?) but that didn't make it into Calvinism. He actually believed the Church was necessary for salvation (again mind blowing!) but that isn't part of Calvinism, is it?

My points here are not doctrinal, they are simply historical. And historically speaking, what today, or even a hundred years after he died, is called Calvinism is not what he taught.

If you want my comments on what is called "Calvinism" I will be happy to share them. I have before and no one really seemed to get what I was saying.

In short, while many of the tenets are true, they are pretty useless. Knowing that God predestinates some and knowing that nothing can separate a Child of God from God doesn't help much. God laid out the plan and the conditions, but he doesn't give the diplomna until you've finished the course.

So there really isn't an opportunity to reason within yourself that you can rest easy because you are predestinated and saved from the beginning... May be true but you don't know for sure if you are part of Eph 1:4 or part of 1 John 2:19.

I am speaking of the teaching itself, not the.man himself. It is about the biblical teaching God gave and why it is important.

 

[Anthony D'Arienzo]

You totally ignored everything in my post.

You did not address scripture. I have told you three times I am a very simple person with many defects .
I have become aware of more gifted persons, sermons, and teaching that I try and help people with
Any positive edification comes from the links and verses offered

 

[Jane_Doe22]

You did not address scripture. I have told you three times I am a very simple person with many defects .
I have become aware of more gifted persons, sermons, and teaching that I try and help people with
Any positive edifivayion

Again, I am not on this thread to study sculpture and God's Truth's.
I'm here to better understand what Anthony believes. For that Anthony needs to use Anthony's words.

 

[Anthony D'Arienzo]

That was already addressed by myself several times (which you probably ignored or missed). Predestination is in order to be conformed to the image of His Son -- perfected and glorified. Which means that those who were seen by God (through divine foreknowledge) to be justified, were also predestined to be perfected.

For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified. (Rom 8:29,30)

1 JOHN 3 (WE SHALL BE LIKE HIM)
1 Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not.

2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.

3 And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure.

Yet that passage in Romans is repeatedly misrepresented to mean that God predestines some for salvation and others for damnation. And that is why Calvinism is damnable doctrine.

Of course this is an unbiblical definition of biblical foreknowledge.

 

[FHII]

It was a good article, I thought. I think too often people throw labels around "Calvinist", like it defines who we are as Christians. And, sure, perhaps it helps narrow the field as to where we sit theologically, but to my mind it tears away what should be of primary importance....that we are to be people of the Word, first and foremost. If Calvin's ideas, or Luthers or whoever's, can be shown biblically to support a Christ centric, Sovereign God, then we embrace it, or parts of it. If not, we dismiss it or learn from it as we compare their errors to scripture.
The very huge problem I have with people attacking Calvinism is twofold: mostly, they attack the 'calvinism' that has been proped up on false understanding and then, they usually fling out big claims like "how could a 'loving' God damn people to hell? That does't sound like the God of the bible"....without ever actually providing scriptural basis for this 'God'. If it can be proven, without a doubt, that God does not predestine, choose or elect before time, some and not others, I would hope that theories would be presented with scriptural backing, rather than arguments based, illogically, on feeling. Especially when we find, repeatedly, this 'predestination' language in scripture.

I read the article and I agree with you that it was good. One or two issues of small matter I didn't agree with at least partially. For instance... Man is totally depraved when compared to God. There are "good" people on the human level. Descent nice folks. But compared to God... No. Our righteousness is a filthy rag. I suppose in the end we agree. Like I said... Small matters.

I started reading Calvin's works because I was too often accused of being a Calvinist. I saw this as an insult both to me and him because I never read his work. I have my views through the preacher I am following and the Bible. It insulted me to call me a follower of a man I never studied. John Calvin would also be insulted by calling me a follower if I never even cracked open one of his books.

But as it turns out we both have the same conclusions based on the Bible. I do not agree with all I read from him (and as I mentioned, I am disturbed by some of his actions in the flesh. He was a hypocrite at times).

However, I like his writings overall. Peoplw don't appreciate his brilliance. Personally I think he was sharper than Luther (no small feat) and just behind Augustine... Though I haven't read enough of Augustine's work to make a fair judgment.

Im rambling now! Let me conclude: Labels are never good! I am a Christian. Non denom... I like Cavins work as I like some of Luther's. But I am one who first looks at what the Bible says. Despite my objections and critical analysis of Calvin, He had alot going on and correct.

 

[FHII]

I am speaking of the teaching itself, not the.man himself. It is about the biblical teaching God gave and why it is important.

Fine Anthony... My original purpose of my post was to clear up what Calvin actually said vs. What Calvinism says. It is a peeve of mine when anyone is misrepresented and I believe John Calvin is misrepresented by what Calvinism has become.

As for the teaching itself, I offered my opinion. In case you missed it I agree with the points of Calvinism at least up to a point. I could knit pick on a few things. But my problem with the whole concept is that it is useless in application. Knowing that God prdestinates some does us no good since he doesn't give us a roll call or roster. He only gives the plan and telks us if we follow it, we are his children.

 

[Enoch111]

Of course this is an unbiblical definition of biblical foreknowledge.

Not at all. Here is the definition as given in Strong's and Thayer's. It simply means to know beforehand.

Strong's Concordance (4268)
prognósis: foreknowledge
Original Word: πρόγνωσις, εως, ἡ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
Transliteration: prognósis
Phonetic Spelling: (prog'-no-sis)
Definition: foreknowledge
Usage: foreknowledge, previous determination.

HELPS Word-studies
Cognate: 4268 prógnōsis (from 4267 /proginṓskō, "foreknow") – properly, foreknowledge. 4268 (prógnōsis) occurs twice in the NT, both times of "God's absolute foreknowledge." See 4267 (proginōskō).

Strong's Concordance (4267)
proginóskó: to know beforehand
Original Word: προγινώσκω
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: proginóskó
Phonetic Spelling: (prog-in-oce'-ko)
Definition: to know beforehand
Usage: I know beforehand, foreknow.

Thayer's Greek Lexicon
STRONGS NT 4267: προγινώσκω
προγινώσκω; 2 aorist 3 person singular προέγνω; perfect passive participle προεγνωσμενος; to have knowledge of beforehand; to foreknow: namely,ταῦτα, 2 Peter 3:17, cf. 2 Peter 3:14, 16; τινα, Acts 26:5;οὕς προέγνω, whom he (God) foreknew, namely, that they would love him, or (with reference to what follows) whom he foreknew to be fit to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, Romans 8:29 (τῶν εἰς αὐτόν(Χριστόν) πιστεύειν προεγνωσμενων, Justin Martyr, dialog contr Trypho...

God knew beforehand -- even before creation -- who would believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and therefore predestined them to be perfected. That's how simple it is.

 

[Anthony D'Arienzo]

Again, I am not on this thread to study sculpture and God's Truth's.
I'm here to better understand what Anthony believes. For that Anthony needs to use Anthony's words.

I am not the subject of the OP.
This is about the false charge of believing Christian's being accused of being cult members.

 

[Enoch111]

You have not shown anything but a handful of verses put of context, some wrong definitions, and the usual inaccurate caricatures and statement.
You cannot work through the.posts and demonstrate your point of view.

This is TOTAL BALONEY. You know it and every person who reads my posts knows it. The Scriptures were NOT taken out of context, and were carefully and properly applied to show all that Calvinism is a False Gospel.

The true Gospel is that since all human beings are sinners, Christ took upon Himself the sin of the world, and God desires the salvation of all men. Therefore He commands all men everywhere to repent and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ.

At the same time God does NOT decree or purpose all the sin, evil and wickedness on this earth. He ALLOWS it for a season. Therefore the Westminster Confession is promoting a false idea of God in this respect.

 

[Anthony D'Arienzo]

Fine Anthony... My original purpose of my post was to clear up what Calvin actually said vs. What Calvinism says. It is a peeve of mine when anyone is misrepresented and I believe John Calvin is misrepresented by what Calvinism has become.

As for the teaching itself, I offered my opinion. In case you missed it I agree with the points of Calvinism at least up to a point. I could knit pick on a few things. But my problem with the whole concept is that it is useless in application. Knowing that God prdestinates some does us no good since he doesn't give us a roll call or roster. He only gives the plan and telks us if we follow it, we are his children.

Thanks for your clarification. I believe these teaching are given to give stability to a persecuted church.

 

[Naomi25]

View attachment 5356
View attachment 5357

Amen!

Ha! You like your graphics! I can't figure out how to post 'em here...I'm not super tech-y. Which is a shame, cause sometimes a good gif or meme just really...speaks...to the occasion!!

 

[Anthony D'Arienzo]

Not at all. Here is the definition as given in Strong's and Thayer's. It simply means to know beforehand.

Strong's Concordance (4268)
prognósis: foreknowledge
Original Word: πρόγνωσις, εως, ἡ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
Transliteration: prognósis
Phonetic Spelling: (prog'-no-sis)
Definition: foreknowledge
Usage: foreknowledge, previous determination.

HELPS Word-studies
Cognate: 4268 prógnōsis (from 4267 /proginṓskō, "foreknow") – properly, foreknowledge. 4268 (prógnōsis) occurs twice in the NT, both times of "God's absolute foreknowledge." See 4267 (proginōskō).

Strong's Concordance (4267)
proginóskó: to know beforehand
Original Word: προγινώσκω
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: proginóskó
Phonetic Spelling: (prog-in-oce'-ko)
Definition: to know beforehand
Usage: I know beforehand, foreknow.

Thayer's Greek Lexicon
STRONGS NT 4267: προγινώσκω
προγινώσκω; 2 aorist 3 person singular προέγνω; perfect passive participle προεγνωσμενος; to have knowledge of beforehand; to foreknow: namely,ταῦτα, 2 Peter 3:17, cf. 2 Peter 3:14, 16; τινα, Acts 26:5;οὕς προέγνω, whom he (God) foreknew, namely, that they would love him, or (with reference to what follows) whom he foreknew to be fit to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, Romans 8:29 (τῶν εἰς αὐτόν(Χριστόν) πιστεύειν προεγνωσμενων, Justin Martyr, dialog contr Trypho...

God knew beforehand -- even before creation -- who would believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and therefore predestined them to be perfected. That's how simple it is.

No....God knew the sinners He was going to save.
Adam knew his wife and she conceived...
Adam knew his wife again and she conceived
Joseph knew not Mary until after the birth of Jesus.
To know the person is to have an intimate knowledge of them......not to look forward in time and see what they will do.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

I am not the subject of the OP.
This is about the false charge of believing Christian's being accused of being cult members.

And my options are here
1) To get out my pitchfork and torch to join the mob trying to lynch Calvinists.
2) Spend the time to civilly actually ask a Calvinist what they believe, listen, and come out with a better understanding and love for that person.

I am trying extremely hard to go with option #2. I am a person of peace and try to truly understand/love other people. But you are making this course extremely difficult and aggravating, and I'm pretty close to giving up on #2 in this case.