You are wrong. But you are right that Calvin was very much dependent on Augustine (although Augustine did not affirm Penal Substitution Theory, so the context also changes).
Last edited:
Calvinism
- Thread starter John Caldwell
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
John Caldwell said:
John Caldwell said:
I should stop digging your pit if I were you. Reformed Baptist churches are Reformed churches that practise Believers' Baptism. That is all you need to know. Many Presbyterian churches are not Reformed or Calvinistic at all.
Augustine did affirm the Doctrine of Penal Substitution. Details on request. But also P.S. is not necessarily a part of Calvinism.
Just a question, Brother; have you ever read the book "Redemption, Accomplished and Applied" by John Murray?
Preacher4Truth
Well-Known Member
Why is it that many claim to have been Reformed/Calvinist only to say later on that they were only going with it because they were construed to be such, like @John Caldwell who claimed he was in the past, but then told us that wasn't true, he never was, only to backtrack and try to claim he used to be?
Charles Finney tried to pull the same thing. I'm reminded of how God described these types as those who crept in unawares, seemingly they claimed to hold to truth only to be found out later that they never did .
Another level of concern: How are the same all of a sudden self-proclaimed experts on Calvinism, yet, they show post by post all they have are straw man arguments, misrepresentations, false accusations, ridicule, mockery, name calling, fabrications and caricatures? They prove they don't even know the teachings at all. And why are there so many that are hoodwinked by their nonsense?
Charles Finney tried to pull the same thing. I'm reminded of how God described these types as those who crept in unawares, seemingly they claimed to hold to truth only to be found out later that they never did .
Another level of concern: How are the same all of a sudden self-proclaimed experts on Calvinism, yet, they show post by post all they have are straw man arguments, misrepresentations, false accusations, ridicule, mockery, name calling, fabrications and caricatures? They prove they don't even know the teachings at all. And why are there so many that are hoodwinked by their nonsense?
lol...Except you are ignoring my comment stating I misspoke.
That is the problem I have with the puppy squad. You guys do not seem to care about truth or an honest discussion but instead look for a "gotcha" moment.
Reformed theology is generally considered synonymous with Calvinism and most often, in the U.S. and the UK, is specifically associated with the theology of the historic church confessions such as the Westminster Confession of Faith or the Three Forms of Unity. (Theopedia)
The term “Reformed” was associated primarily with Calvin’s work in the church of Geneva (Reformed Theological Seminary)
You already have RC Sproul's definition (@Mjh29 rejected it).
So it is up to who is defining it (like "foreknowledge" and "forsake", I suppose).
Lol.....sure he did, Steve....just like most of the Early Church Fathers and Martin Luther taught Penal Substitution Theory
Let's just ignore that Augustine explicitly (and strongly) denied that Christ had to die to appease the Father.
Last edited:
Preacher4Truth
Well-Known Member
I heard one say we (Calvinist/Reformed) are like puppies who step in their own excrement (there were other abusive and obscene gestures) and not a thing was done about that, yet, I'm missing responses from a couple of brothers who cannot respond, because they were bold enough to call out the fabrications, behaviors and language.
Must be based upon the number of people who gang up on one side of the camp and report posts, or, it's nothing but a bias toward one camp, so the other gets a bye?
It's worth noting one followed another here, harassed him, "followed" him, made threads about him, ridiculed him by name, the other defended himself, called this out, and the latter is gone?
Just wondering out loud and asking for clarification.
Must be based upon the number of people who gang up on one side of the camp and report posts, or, it's nothing but a bias toward one camp, so the other gets a bye?
It's worth noting one followed another here, harassed him, "followed" him, made threads about him, ridiculed him by name, the other defended himself, called this out, and the latter is gone?
Just wondering out loud and asking for clarification.
I think it is the assumptions that gets you guys.
I "trolled" Anthony by "following" him here.
By that logic Steve "followed" me here. Are you condemning Steve? No. He is a member of the puppy squad.
That makes perfect sense
In truth, I came here without following anyone. But you seem to find an agenda and conspiracy everywhere (when it suits you).
Tinfoil hat or liberal politician? ROFL
Where exactly is your admission that you misspoke? It's not in your post #1740; that just contains more snidies. You really can't stop, can you?
Yep! Just like that.
There's quite a bit on the subject in his Against Faustus. He was inconsistent in some of his comments, but, hey, none of us is perfect.'But as Christ endured death as man, and for man; so also, Son of God as He was, ever living in His own righteousness, but dying for our offences, He submitted as man, and for man, to bear the curse which accompanies death. And as He died in the flesh which He took in bearing our punishment, so also, while ever blessed in His own righteousness, He was cursed for our offenses, in the death which He suffered in bearing our punishment.'
Preacher4Truth
Well-Known Member
Preacher4Truth
Well-Known Member
That's just the plain teaching of Scripture. Natural man rejects this teaching.Where exactly is your admission that you misspoke? It's not in your post #1740; that just contains more snidies. You really can't stop, can you?
Yep! Just like that.
'But as Christ endured death as man, and for man; so also, Son of God as He was, ever living in His own righteousness, but dying for our offences, He submitted as man, and for man, to bear the curse which accompanies death. And as He died in the flesh which He took in bearing our punishment, so also, while ever blessed in His own righteousness, He was cursed for our offenses, in the death which He suffered in bearing our punishment.'
Preacher4Truth
Well-Known Member
Grailhunter
Well-Known Member
Don't get me wrong it is fun watching the puppet its talk. So is it the natural man that only has free-will?
But you are right about Augustine, then again, Augustine and John Calvin shared the same poor character and were both more or less insane.....appropriate foundations for Calvinism.
I do not know where it is (ask David, he knows). Frankly, I do not care. It does not relate to the topic of the OP.Where exactly is your admission that you misspoke? It's not in your post #1740; that just contains more snidies. You really can't stop, can you?
Yep! Just like that.
'But as Christ endured death as man, and for man; so also, Son of God as He was, ever living in His own righteousness, but dying for our offences, He submitted as man, and for man, to bear the curse which accompanies death. And as He died in the flesh which He took in bearing our punishment, so also, while ever blessed in His own righteousness, He was cursed for our offenses, in the death which He suffered in bearing our punishment.'
And I never claimed Augustine rejected Substitution. I said he strongly rejected the idea Christ had to die to satisfy God (much less divine justice). So he did not affirm Penal Substitution Theory.
You do not have to believe history, Steve. There are people who believe Justin Martyr and Irenaeus taught Penal Substitution Theory as well (I am stating a fact, not accusing you of such foolishness).
People can believe whatever they want to believe.
That is one problem today. People try to shove their theology down other peoples throats and shut down any opposing view.
Yep! There's no accounting for the foolishness of some people. There are even those who believe that the Bible doesn't teach Penal Substitution. can you believe it?
Augustine
“This, the catholic faith has known of the one and only mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus, who condescended to undergo death—that is, the penalty of sin—without sin, for us. As He alone became the Son of man, in order that we might become through Him sons of God, so He alone, on our behalf, undertook punishment without ill deservings, that we through Him might obtain grace without good deservings. Because as to us nothing good was due so to Him nothing bad was due. Therefore, commending His love to them to whom He was about to give undeserved life, He was willing to suffer for them an undeserved death.” (Against Two Letters of the Pelagians, Book 4, chap. 7)
A substitution but not Penal Substitution Theory
"Was then His Son already so far appeased towards us, that He even deigned to die for us; while the Father was still so far angry, that except His Son died for us, He would not be appeased? And what, then, is that which the same teacher of the Gentiles himself says in another place: What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us, who can be against us? He that spared not His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all; how has He not with Him also freely given us all things? Pray, unless the Father had been already appeased, would He have delivered up His own Son, not sparing Him for us? Does not this opinion seem to be as it were contrary to that? In the one, the Son dies for us, and the Father is reconciled to us by His death; in the other, as though the Father first loved us, He Himself on our account does not spare the Son, He Himself for us delivers Him up to death. But I see that the Father lovedus also before, not only before the Son died for us, but before He created the world; the apostlehimself being witness, who says, According as He has chosen us in Him before the foundation of the world. Nor was the Son delivered up for us as it were unwillingly, the Father Himself not sparing Him; for it is said also concerning Him, Who loved me, and delivered up Himself for me.Therefore together both the Father and the Son, and the Spirit of both, work all things equally and harmoniously; yet we are justified in the blood of Christ, and we are reconciled to God by the death of His Son" (Augustine, On the Trinity)
"Was then His Son already so far appeased towards us, that He even deigned to die for us; while the Father was still so far angry, that except His Son died for us, He would not be appeased? And what, then, is that which the same teacher of the Gentiles himself says in another place: What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us, who can be against us? He that spared not His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all; how has He not with Him also freely given us all things? Pray, unless the Father had been already appeased, would He have delivered up His own Son, not sparing Him for us? Does not this opinion seem to be as it were contrary to that? In the one, the Son dies for us, and the Father is reconciled to us by His death; in the other, as though the Father first loved us, He Himself on our account does not spare the Son, He Himself for us delivers Him up to death. But I see that the Father lovedus also before, not only before the Son died for us, but before He created the world; the apostlehimself being witness, who says, According as He has chosen us in Him before the foundation of the world. Nor was the Son delivered up for us as it were unwillingly, the Father Himself not sparing Him; for it is said also concerning Him, Who loved me, and delivered up Himself for me.Therefore together both the Father and the Son, and the Spirit of both, work all things equally and harmoniously; yet we are justified in the blood of Christ, and we are reconciled to God by the death of His Son" (Augustine, On the Trinity)
Last edited:
Preacher4Truth
Well-Known Member
Hey brother, how are you? I know you meant the above to be demeaning, to get a rise out of me, others, but it's OK, I forgive you. I know you really didn't mean anything by it, it's just the natural man in you, where you are at, spiritually speaking, 1 Corinthians 2:14 &c.
One thing that is wondrous is the fact that the God of the universe, who is holy, gracious, merciful, came to save those whom he had chosen to be in Christ before the foundation of the world, Ephesians 1. That is wonderful news, and he did this to set us free from the above behavior of yours, mine, all of His, or, as stated in Scripture, save us (His people) from our sins, Matthew 1:21. That is wonderful news!
Similar threads
- Locked
