Calvinism is a Cult

  • 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!

Enoch111

Well-Known Member
May 27, 2018
17,688
15,996
113
Alberta
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
But make no error on this... Calvinism is not what John preached.
So what? Even the Calvinists concede that those are the Five Points of Calvinism. So do you accept them or reject them?
 

FHII

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2011
4,833
2,494
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
So what? Even the Calvinists concede that those are the Five Points of Calvinism. So do you accept them or reject them?
I reject them. I do not agree with all of them so I reject them as a whole. I accept predestination because it is biblical but I reject its misuse.

My main point is to clear John Calvin of Calvinism. The man had his faults, but don't blame the teacher for misuse of his teachings.
 

Anthony D'Arienzo

Well-Known Member
Jan 3, 2019
2,585
2,084
113
70
georgia
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I am simply trying to understand YOUR beliefs. Whether I find them to be 100% Biblical or completely anti-Biblical is irreverent. I'm not here to engage in pointless prosytlzing/debating/arguing. I just want to better understand what YOU believe to better understand and care about you in the spirit of love. As I've explained before, you need to explain your logic with your words. But you refuse to do that, and instead insult me for spending the time to try to understand you. It's like I'm reaching out to give you a hug and getting slapped over and over again for it.
This isn't helping me understand your logic at all, and instead giving me and just generating this extremely negative impression of you and your beliefs.
My words do not matter. Scripture is what matters.
Real love is only found in the realm of spiritual truth.
This confirms that you are not seeking to search the truth out.. if you respond to what is posted then progress can happen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SovereignGrace

Anthony D'Arienzo

Well-Known Member
Jan 3, 2019
2,585
2,084
113
70
georgia
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Why on earth would saved people (Calvinists) even bother to talk to none saved people...if it is already pre ordained? It seems a bit foolish to me.

I did hear that if Calvin heard what is “said to be” Calvinism today. He would be horrified.
If you read the previous posts this has been answered several times.
 

Anthony D'Arienzo

Well-Known Member
Jan 3, 2019
2,585
2,084
113
70
georgia
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I reject them. I do not agree with all of them so I reject them as a whole. I accept predestination because it is biblical but I reject its misuse.

My main point is to clear John Calvin of Calvinism. The man had his faults, but don't blame the teacher for misuse of his teachings.
John taught Calvinism from start to finish.
No one looks to Calvin or Luther, but rather to scripture for the teaching.
These men wrote about it before others so it gets a label or name from them.
The teaching is from Jesus, the Apostles, and Prophets
Offer your scriptural position and we can interact.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SovereignGrace

Jane_Doe22

Well-Known Member
Jul 29, 2018
5,241
3,442
113
116
Mid-west USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
My words do not matter. Scripture is what matters.
Real love is only found in the realm of spiritual truth.
This confirms that you are not seeking to search the truth out.. if you respond to what is posted then progress can happen.
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.
 

Helen

Well-Known Member
Oct 22, 2011
15,476
21,155
113
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Late for the arguement again!

Look, I just want to make some points and I'd like them to be acknowledged! I dislike false representation.

John Calvin was not a Calvinist! I have read his work. Not all of it, but enough of it. If you blame me for not reading it all, then you read it all then get back to me.

The fact is that he wrote so much that a scholar would be busy for 8 years to get it all down. If you doubt me, google his catalogue.

Dozens of books and literally thousands of chapters. Yet it is 3 chapters of one book that gave birth to "Calvinism". Not that those 3 chapters support the tenets of Calvinism or his works (writings) as a whole do.

But like Martin Luther, students far removed from his teaching era isolated and corrupted what he taught.

As for John Calvin... He was a brilliant theologian whose sharp tongue reminds me of Tertilkian, Luther and at times even Augstine. I admire him for that, but I find fault with his actions. He'd curse the Pope on Sunday and hob-knob with is men on Wednesday. He was a hypocrite.

But make no error on this... Calvinism is not what John preached.

Well said brother...true word...bless you!

....Thumb.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: FHII

Enoch111

Well-Known Member
May 27, 2018
17,688
15,996
113
Alberta
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
The teaching is from Jesus, the Apostles, and Prophets
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.
 

Mjh29

Well-Known Member
May 28, 2017
1,466
1,433
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
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.
And do we wonder WHY this was made? The 5 points were made in response to the 5 points of Arminianism, which went against the beliefs the church had held up to that point. Aminianism was condemned as the heresy! The 5 points of Calvinism, which were called TULIP, simply restated the beliefs of the church! And by the way, The 5 points of Arminianism didn't come out until after Arminius died.... one can only wonder why he didn't want to push his beliefs, and why his followers were the ones that had to do it.... probably because he himself knew what he was teaching was heresy according to the long-standing church. And by the way, The delegation was comprised of 111 delegates from all over Europe, who met for 154 meetings, and all of the unanimously declared Arminianism heresy and they were the ones that formed the points.

And the orginal document was comprised of more Scripture than their own writing... but of course it was man-made, so it can't be true. Good thing we don't apply the same flawed logic to theology text books and devotionals, otherwise I need to clean out my shelves.... but of course this logic only applies to the things we don't like, right?

I don't think the majority of Christians would be opposed to it if they actualy took the time to understand what they believe, and not what you think I believe. And perhaps if we stopped robbing God of the glory and power He so clearly states He has, and stopped trying to be the ones who saved ourselves because it makes us feel good and justified, then you would actually see what Calvin and the others fought and gave their lives to teach.
 

Waiting on him

Well-Known Member
Dec 21, 2018
11,674
6,096
113
56
North America
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
And do we wonder WHY this was made? The 5 points were made in response to the 5 points of Arminianism, which went against the beliefs the church had held up to that point. Aminianism was condemned as the heresy! The 5 points of Calvinism, which were called TULIP, simply restated the beliefs of the church! And by the way, The 5 points of Arminianism didn't come out until after Arminius died.... one can only wonder why he didn't want to push his beliefs, and why his followers were the ones that had to do it.... probably because he himself knew what he was teaching was heresy according to the long-standing church. And by the way, The delegation was comprised of 111 delegates from all over Europe, who met for 154 meetings, and all of the unanimously declared Arminianism heresy and they were the ones that formed the points.

And the orginal document was comprised of more Scripture than their own writing... but of course it was man-made, so it can't be true. Good thing we don't apply the same flawed logic to theology text books and devotionals, otherwise I need to clean out my shelves.... but of course this logic only applies to the things we don't like, right?

I don't think the majority of Christians would be opposed to it if they actualy took the time to understand what they believe, and not what you think I believe. And perhaps if we stopped robbing God of the glory and power He so clearly states He has, and stopped trying to be the ones who saved ourselves because it makes us feel good and justified, then you would actually see what Calvin and the others fought and gave their lives to teach.
I haven’t read any of these documents, but have read some of the Bible and can see why Calvin and their other beliefs are so strong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mjh29

Naomi25

Well-Known Member
Aug 10, 2016
3,199
1,801
113
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
Romans 9 is not about salvation.

Once again I see your wonderful work of opinion backed by bible exegesis. Are we just suppose to take your word that your opinions come from scripture? It's hard to know since you rarely post any...
Romans 9 is about God's sovereign choice. The Chapter begins with Paul being ready to loose his salvation in place of his kinsmen. This implies that some Jews are perishing, which raises the question about God's promises to Israel...had they failed? Paul says no! Well...why not? Because, Paul tells us, not all who are descended from Israel 'belong' to Israel. In other words, God's purpose was to not to aquit every individual Jew...instead, he had a purpose of election.
To illustrate this purpose, Paul gives us Easu and Jacob, one whom God chose, the other God did not, before either had been born and done anything; "in order that God's purpose of election might continue".
In other words, God’s original purpose in choosing individuals for himself out of Israel was not based on any conditions that they would meet. It was an unconditional election. Jesus confirms this teaching when he says “All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out” (John 6:36).
Coming to Jesus is not a condition we meet to qualify for election. It is the result of election. The Father has chosen his sheep. They are his. And he gives them to the Son. That is why they come. “No one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father” (John 6:65). “You did not choose me, but I chose you” (John 15:16; see John 17:2, 6, 9; Gal 1:15).

Romans 11 is not Calvinism.
What a silly way to put it. Of course Romans 11 is not "Calvinism". Calvinism is but a doctrine we might pull from lots of various verses as we see a whole coming together. And, might I add, even Calvin himself wouldn't recongize some of the "Calvinism" of today. There has grown to be some foolishness around it all. There is a good article one can read on it here:
5 Myths about Calvinism

But Romans 11? I would say it doesn't heavily address the topic. It does so in a peripheral manner, in the fact that God, in his Sovereign design, will (or might) choose to graft Israel back into the Olive tree.

Romans 8 spells it out. Salvation per foreknowledge, not predestination.

Romans 8 is one of the most rich chapters of all scripture. It's hard to know where to even begin, to be honest, since what it says in and of itself is incredible, but it also links with so many other scriptures. But, I suppose, for this purpose, we'll look at this bit, as it's what you're talking about:

And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose. For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified. -Romans 8:28–30

We see first, that people are "called according to his purpose". We know, from Romans 9:11
(though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad—in order that God's purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls) that God's purpose of election is not only a major theme of Chapter 9, but of God's promises to the Jewish people! There is no denying the fact that in the example Paul gave, God chose Jacob but rejected Esau, based not on works, attitude or understanding, but on God's purposes.
The verse then goes onto say that "those whom he foreknew he also predestined". You claim that those who are predestined God 'foreknows' first...basically...he knows who will choose him, and therefore he picks them. Which is a ridiculous circle of 'which comes first, chicken or egg?' With scriptures that tell us that "no one seeks God, not one" and "all fall short of the glory of God", we must either understand the bible to be contradictory, or understand that God, being Sovereign and Lord over all, time and destiny included, called some, and not others.
But, in point of fact, there is no contradictory note in the term 'foreknew'. When we look back to the OT, we see this term 'knew' (or 'know') where it emphasizes God’s special choice of, or covenantal affection for, his people (Gen 19:19; Jer 1:5; Amos 3:2). In fact, in Romans 11:2 we see where “foreknew” functions as the contrast to “rejected,” showing that it emphasizes God’s choosing his people (1 Pet 1:2, 20).
Basically, what the text is saying here is, God predestined us to be a covenantal people. He chose us before the foundation of the world to be 'known' as HIS people.
 

Mjh29

Well-Known Member
May 28, 2017
1,466
1,433
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I haven’t read any of these documents, but have read some of the Bible and can see why Calvin and their other beliefs are so strong.
Because Calvinism grounds it's beliefs 100% on what the Bible actually says, not on what it wants the Bible to say. You can twist Scripture all day and make almost anything sound good, but Calvinism tries its best to tell you what the Bible actually says. I prefer to call it Reformed Theology, because we have this notion that this whole thing was started and pushed by Calvin, when in reality it was a massive movement of men such as Luther, Zwingli, Edwards, Knox, Calvin, and even some more household names like Spurgeon. Spurgeon is a HUGE name, and people like to step over the fact that he wrote an entire series of sermons teaching and defending the 5 points!
 
  • Like
Reactions: SovereignGrace

Mjh29

Well-Known Member
May 28, 2017
1,466
1,433
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Once again I see your wonderful work of opinion backed by bible exegesis. Are we just suppose to take your word that your opinions come from scripture? It's hard to know since you rarely post any...
Romans 9 is about God's sovereign choice. The Chapter begins with Paul being ready to loose his salvation in place of his kinsmen. This implies that some Jews are perishing, which raises the question about God's promises to Israel...had they failed? Paul says no! Well...why not? Because, Paul tells us, not all who are descended from Israel 'belong' to Israel. In other words, God's purpose was to not to aquit every individual Jew...instead, he had a purpose of election.
To illustrate this purpose, Paul gives us Easu and Jacob, one whom God chose, the other God did not, before either had been born and done anything; "in order that God's purpose of election might continue".
In other words, God’s original purpose in choosing individuals for himself out of Israel was not based on any conditions that they would meet. It was an unconditional election. Jesus confirms this teaching when he says “All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out” (John 6:36).
Coming to Jesus is not a condition we meet to qualify for election. It is the result of election. The Father has chosen his sheep. They are his. And he gives them to the Son. That is why they come. “No one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father” (John 6:65). “You did not choose me, but I chose you” (John 15:16; see John 17:2, 6, 9; Gal 1:15).


What a silly way to put it. Of course Romans 11 is not "Calvinism". Calvinism is but a doctrine we might pull from lots of various verses as we see a whole coming together. And, might I add, even Calvin himself wouldn't recongize some of the "Calvinism" of today. There has grown to be some foolishness around it all. There is a good article one can read on it here:
5 Myths about Calvinism

But Romans 11? I would say it doesn't heavily address the topic. It does so in a peripheral manner, in the fact that God, in his Sovereign design, will (or might) choose to graft Israel back into the Olive tree.



Romans 8 is one of the most rich chapters of all scripture. It's hard to know where to even begin, to be honest, since what it says in and of itself is incredible, but it also links with so many other scriptures. But, I suppose, for this purpose, we'll look at this bit, as it's what you're talking about:

And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose. For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified. -Romans 8:28–30

We see first, that people are "called according to his purpose". We know, from Romans 9:11
(though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad—in order that God's purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls) that God's purpose of election is not only a major theme of Chapter 9, but of God's promises to the Jewish people! There is no denying the fact that in the example Paul gave, God chose Jacob but rejected Esau, based not on works, attitude or understanding, but on God's purposes.
The verse then goes onto say that "those whom he foreknew he also predestined". You claim that those who are predestined God 'foreknows' first...basically...he knows who will choose him, and therefore he picks them. Which is a ridiculous circle of 'which comes first, chicken or egg?' With scriptures that tell us that "no one seeks God, not one" and "all fall short of the glory of God", we must either understand the bible to be contradictory, or understand that God, being Sovereign and Lord over all, time and destiny included, called some, and not others.
But, in point of fact, there is no contradictory note in the term 'foreknew'. When we look back to the OT, we see this term 'knew' (or 'know') where it emphasizes God’s special choice of, or covenantal affection for, his people (Gen 19:19; Jer 1:5; Amos 3:2). In fact, in Romans 11:2 we see where “foreknew” functions as the contrast to “rejected,” showing that it emphasizes God’s choosing his people (1 Pet 1:2, 20).
Basically, what the text is saying here is, God predestined us to be a covenantal people. He chose us before the foundation of the world to be 'known' as HIS people.

Amen! clapping.gif
 

FHII

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2011
4,833
2,494
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
John taught Calvinism from start to finish.

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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jane_Doe22

FHII

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2011
4,833
2,494
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
And, might I add, even Calvin himself wouldn't recongize some of the "Calvinism" of today.
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.