John Calvin and Calvinism.

[Scott Downey]

So, I was doing a little reading here : TULIP: 5-Point Calvinism Explained and I have to say that I’m a bit shocked … to say the least.
Basically Calvinism says that there are a few chosen ones and the rest are damned to hell.
This is the most depressing idea I’ve read next to materialistic atheists.
This view which closely aligns with atheism in mindset, says that there’s no difference between Adolph Hitler and Mother Teresa.
This view lets me get away with murder and to do whatever I want because in the end …. it doesn’t really matter because some are chosen and most are not.
Wow. Even reading the Horoscope is more hopeful.

And that is the reality of what really happens. the vast majority of people that have been born are not Christians.
Only Christians go to heaven. All Muslims are in hell fire, all Buddhists, nihilists, animists, and any other religion are all in hell or going there unless they repent of their unbelief in Christ. And then there are the false teachers, false prophets, false brethren, hypocrites, they also go to hell. Jesus lumps them all together, a false teacher would include those of some other religion. Jesus says many are deceived.

Matthew 24
The Signs of the Times and the End of the Age
3 Now as He sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?”

4 And Jesus answered and said to them: “Take heed that no one deceives you. 5 For many will come in My name, saying, ‘I am the Christ,’ and will deceive many. 6 And you will hear of wars and rumors of wars. See that you are not troubled; for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet. 7 For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. And there will be famines, pestilences, and earthquakes in various places. 8 All these are the beginning of sorrows.

 

[Lifelong_sinner]

Main reason is the Servetus incident. I have read many commentaries on it from both sides. The bottom line is that this man didn't have to die and Calvin could have prevented it. There are other minor things that lead me to believe he played both sides of the protestant/Catholic fence. That's a bit hypocritical, but not as noteworthy.

There are a few theological things I also disagree with him on as well. But there isn't a person on this board yet that I haven't disagreed with as well. So, it comes down to Servetus mostly.

If you are a fan of Calvin, rest assured I have plenty to praise him about. I am one of the rare people that has actually read some of his works (and he wrote a lot, so no... I haven't read all).

Do I prefer Luther over Calvin? No. I disagree with Luther on some things as well and admire him for other things. I consider them both important Men of God. They both had important things they brought out. They had their differences, they were in the same era and seemed to have a mutual appreciation for each other despite their differences.

So, bottom line... Servetus. Calvin did him wrong, when he (Calvin) had been just as strong against the Catholic doctrine as he (Servetus) was, but on different issues.

ahhh yes, Servetus. I think calvin got a bad rap for that. Steve lawson wrote about this, in a Q&A session once, lawson had this to say about that whole incident.
“In 1553, the city fathers burned Servetus - Calvin did not. Calvin did not prosecute him, and had no powers of execution. Calvin wasn't even a citizen of Geneva at the time. Calvin was only an expert witness, and argued for a more humane death. The RCC had already condemned Servetus to death, and Servetus begged not to be sent back to their hands. Servetus was given the option to leave Geneva, and refused. Servetus was executed by civil authorities, not elders or pastors or teachers. The civil authorities were Calvin's enemies, not his supporters. They consulted other cities' leaders, and they agreed to put him to death. Servetus would have been executed, regardless. Servetus defiantly ignored a warning not to come to Geneva. He was the only heretic to be executed for blasphemy, as opposed to the hundreds of thousands martyred by Rome during the Inquisition.”

servetus denied the Trinity. He was trying to bait calvin for a fight, it backfired on him. Still, servetus should have known better.

 

[Enoch111]

Enoch, I appreciate your efforts, but there is a problem. You haven't fully quoted Calvin. You left out important parts which further explain his position and address the concerns and "contradictions" you charge him with.

Not really. I have not fully quoted ALL his contradictions. And if two glaring contradictions are not enough, then a dozen would make no difference. A Christian has to be consistent, no matter which venue he is in. You cannot have biblical commentaries and unbiblical theologies. If you have not examined the Westminster Confession of Faith, take a look at what it teaches and compare it with the Bible. That's Reformed Theology, whether you call it Calvinism or anything.

This quote from Calvin's Institutes is almost identical to what you will find in the Westminster Confession: "By predestination we mean the eternal decree of God, by which he determined with himself whatever he wished to happen with regard to every man. All are not created on equal terms, but some are preordained to eternal life, others to eternal damnation; and, accordingly, as each has been created for one or other of these ends, we say that he has been predestinated to life or to death." Institutes III. 21. 5.

So it would be fair to conclude from this statement that some (or many) are excluded from salvation. Now let's see Calvin CONTRADICT this abominable doctrine in his commentary on John 1:29 (Bible Hub).

CALVIN'S COMMENTARY: THE WHOLE HUMAN RACE COVERED
"Who taketh away the sin of the world. He uses the word sin in the singular number, for any kind of iniquity; as if he had said, that every kind of unrighteousness which alienates men from God is taken away by Christ. And when he says, the sin Of The World, he extends this favor indiscriminately to the whole human race; that the Jews might not think that he had been sent to them alone. But hence we infer that the whole world is involved in the same condemnation; and that as all men without exception are guilty of unrighteousness before God, they need to be reconciled to him. John the Baptist, therefore, by speaking generally of the sin of the world, intended to impress upon us the conviction of our own misery, and to exhort us to seek the remedy. Now our duty is, to embrace the benefit which is offered to all, that each of us may be convinced that there is nothing to hinder him from obtaining reconciliation in Christ, provided that he comes to him by the guidance of faith."...

I am presenting exact quotations, and there can be no excusing or explaining here. This is the written record which Calvin has made after due consideration. So the real issue is this "Why did Calvin contradict his own biblical commentary in order to MANUFACTURE Reformed Theology"? Who was instigating him to manufacture damnable doctrines?

 

[Lifelong_sinner]

Not really. I have not fully quoted ALL his contradictions. And if two glaring contradictions are not enough, then a dozen would make no difference. A Christian has to be consistent, no matter which venue he is in. You cannot have biblical commentaries and unbiblical theologies. If you have not examined the Westminster Confession of Faith, take a look at what it teaches and compare it with the Bible. That's Reformed Theology, whether you call it Calvinism or anything.

This quote from Calvin's Institutes is almost identical to what you will find in the Westminster Confession: "By predestination we mean the eternal decree of God, by which he determined with himself whatever he wished to happen with regard to every man. All are not created on equal terms, but some are preordained to eternal life, others to eternal damnation; and, accordingly, as each has been created for one or other of these ends, we say that he has been predestinated to life or to death." Institutes III. 21. 5.

So it would be fair to conclude from this statement that some (or many) are excluded from salvation. Now let's see Calvin CONTRADICT this abominable doctrine in his commentary on John 1:29 (Bible Hub).

CALVIN'S COMMENTARY: THE WHOLE HUMAN RACE COVERED
"Who taketh away the sin of the world. He uses the word sin in the singular number, for any kind of iniquity; as if he had said, that every kind of unrighteousness which alienates men from God is taken away by Christ. And when he says, the sin Of The World, he extends this favor indiscriminately to the whole human race; that the Jews might not think that he had been sent to them alone. But hence we infer that the whole world is involved in the same condemnation; and that as all men without exception are guilty of unrighteousness before God, they need to be reconciled to him. John the Baptist, therefore, by speaking generally of the sin of the world, intended to impress upon us the conviction of our own misery, and to exhort us to seek the remedy. Now our duty is, to embrace the benefit which is offered to all, that each of us may be convinced that there is nothing to hinder him from obtaining reconciliation in Christ, provided that he comes to him by the guidance of faith."...

I am presenting exact quotations, and there can be no excusing or explaining here. This is the written record which Calvin has made after due consideration. So the real issue is this "Why did Calvin contradict his own biblical commentary in order to MANUFACTURE Reformed Theology"? Who was instigating him to manufacture damnable doctrines?

i still dont see where calvin contradicted himself. First, the WCF is completely Biblical, to include the longer and short catechisms. Second, yes, the majority of mankind will end up in hell. So calvin is right in his writing of predestination/election. Third, he is correct again when he says that all men are guilty of unrighteousness before God. Fourth, and im assuming this is where you’re confused, yes, God would love for everyone to be saved. The angels rejoice in Heaven everytime someone is saved. But that doesnt mean that everyone will be saved. Majority wont be. I still cant see where the confusion here is.
God uses us to spread the word. That doesnt mean people will automatically get saved. Jesus’ death was SUFFICIENT for all sin, but its only EFFICIENT for those who are of the elect. I think your hatred of calvin is getting in the way of your understanding.

 

[Scott Downey]

i still dont see where calvin contradicted himself. First, the WCF is completely Biblical, to include the longer and short catechisms. Second, yes, the majority of mankind will end up in hell. So calvin is right in his writing of predestination/election. Third, he is correct again when he says that all men are guilty of unrighteousness before God. Fourth, and im assuming this is where you’re confused, yes, God would love for everyone to be saved. The angels rejoice in Heaven everytime someone is saved. But that doesnt mean that everyone will be saved. Majority wont be. I still cant see where the confusion here is.
God uses us to spread the word. That doesnt mean people will automatically get saved. Jesus’ death was SUFFICIENT for all sin, but its only EFFICIENT for those who are of the elect. I think your hatred of calvin is getting in the way of your understanding.

Agree, not a contradiction at all.
The first example is individual predestination, scriptural and also Martin Luthor held the same view.
The second example is by faith all people from wherever they live are reconciled to God, that includes people from all nations.
God holds people responsible for the sin of rejecting His command to repent and believe all the while having chosen some to be saved and some not to be saved. All people all over the world are commanded to repent of their unbelief. The only ones who actually do are those God has granted to come to Christ.

Some posters might try to charge God with being in conflict with Himself too then.

Jesus in John 6 tells us much of the doctrine
Romans 11 has to do with nations and not individuals, gentile nations versus the jewish nation.

Paul in Acts 17, versus much of Paul's letters to the church about election and calling are examples of both of Calvin's points.
Apostle Paul is not conflicted, and neither is Calvin

Acts 17 example of Calvin's second point

30 Truly, these times of ignorance God overlooked, but now commands all men everywhere to repent, 31 because He has appointed a day on which He will judge the world in righteousness by the Man whom He has ordained. He has given assurance of this to all by raising Him from the dead.”

32 And when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some mocked, while others said, “We will hear you again on this matter.”
33 So Paul departed from among them.

 

[PinSeeker]

So, bottom line... Servetus. Calvin did him wrong, when he (Calvin) had been just as strong against the Catholic doctrine as he (Servetus) was, but on different issues.

No one is without sin, FHII. Nobody is perfect. Except, well, Jesus, of course...

Too, if you had lived in the 1500s (rather than the 2000s), you might have thunk much differently. Not to say that what is "not right" now was "right" back then or anything like that, but I think you get me. Those were tumultuous times. These times now are, too, but for different reasons.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[FHII]

No one is without sin, FHII. Nobody is perfect. Except, well, Jesus, of course...

I realize that... I still give Calvin his due credit and if grace is as strong as it is suggested, he is forgiven. However, it was still wrong and I still believe Calvin could have prevented it.

Too, if you had lived in the 1500s (rather than the 2000s), you might have thunk much differently. Not to say that what is "not right" now was "right" back then or anything like that, but I think you get me. Those were tumultuous times. These times now are, too, but for different reasons.

Perhaps... But Jesus Christ is the same today, in the 1500's and forever. It was still wrong as preached in the Bible.

 

[FHII]

I am presenting exact quotations, and there can be no excusing or explaining here. This is the written record which Calvin has made after due consideration. So the real issue is this "Why did Calvin contradict his own biblical commentary in order to MANUFACTURE Reformed Theology"? Who was instigating him to manufacture damnable doctrines?

I suggested to you that you were in error for partially quoting Calvin, when if you had read and posted more, Calvin addresses your concerns and proves your concerns to be wrong. In tour rebuttal, you have made the same mistake: you fail to hear the conclusion of the whole matter. Your quotations are correct but they are not complete.

Aside from Calvin, whether you like it or not, the predestination God has is Biblical. It is talked about in the OT and NT extensively. Now you pulled a short quote from I believe Institutes book 3, ch 21 point 5. Yet, had you read the whole chapter, you would not have rightfully come to the same conclusion, nor compared it to John 1. In fact, its funny that you did such because Calvin addresses the very concern you bring up... You just didn't read it, or if you did read it, failed to see what he was saying.

God at one point let it be known that Israel was his chosen and the predestined. They failed to measure up, yet God has not totally cast them aside.

After that, God has predestined from both the gentiles and Israel individuals (not just nations) but has not revealed the names. He gives the task, the markers and says this is what they will do. But never reveals the names of individuals other than a very few. 13 in number... Maybe as may as 15 or 16. Thus, even with grace we have boundaries and a race to run. This is why Calvin said while we have grace, it is not a license to sin (yea.... You have Calvin to thank for that phrase! Pretty mind-blowing, huh?)

So in reading Calvin on this particular subject, I see no contradiction in his statements which you have given. I see no contradiction between his statements and the Bible. Not on this part, anyway. I only see a contradiction between him and your beliefs.

 

[Enoch111]

Your quotations are correct but they are not complete.

Do you have to drink the whole bottle of poison when only a few drops can easily kill you? Plain statements by theologians must be taken for what they are. It is politicians who try to obfuscate what they said so that the real meaning is hidden.

 

[PinSeeker]

Do you have to drink the whole bottle of poison when only a few drops can easily kill you? Plain statements by theologians must be taken for what they are. It is politicians who try to obfuscate what they said so that the real meaning is hidden.

All due respect, Enoch, but a ridiculous analogy. Not analogous at all. Regarding the Institutes... Hidden? Pfffft. Nothing is hidden; it's there for all to see, but seeing sometimes requires some diligence. In this case, reading all the way to the end of the chapter/section.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[Enoch111]

In this case, reading all the way to the end of the chapter/section.

No need to read all that Calvin wrote in his Institutes. It is quite clear from the EXACT quotations I have provided that Calvin was double-minded and playing theological games (to the detriment of everyone). And that is only the tip of the iceberg. Like I said, if a few drops of poison will kill you, you do not need drink the entire bottle. The sad fact is that Calvinists have been sucked into the lies, when his commentaries were presenting the truth.

 

[Lifelong_sinner]

No need to read all that Calvin wrote in his Institutes. It is quite clear from the EXACT quotations I have provided that Calvin was double-minded and playing theological games (to the detriment of everyone). And that is only the tip of the iceberg. Like I said, if a few drops of poison will kill you, you do not need drink the entire bottle. The sad fact is that Calvinists have been sucked into the lies, when his commentaries were presenting the truth.

 

[robert derrick]

View attachment 19824

The problem with the graph is it only recognizes the splintering off from the single line at the beginning.

It should include that same single line running through the midst of all the splinters: The apostles' doctrine written in Scripture, which is the doctrine of Christ.

That's the only line that matters. All the rest is a splintered mess.

 

[robert derrick]

No need to read all that Calvin wrote in his Institutes. It is quite clear from the EXACT quotations I have provided that Calvin was double-minded and playing theological games (to the detriment of everyone). And that is only the tip of the iceberg. Like I said, if a few drops of poison will kill you, you do not need drink the entire bottle. The sad fact is that Calvinists have been sucked into the lies, when his commentaries were presenting the truth.

True. Once you see one poison fruit of a rotten tree, you don't need to wade through the rest.

Unless, it is a purposed review of how people can get it so wrong.

But, like political media, even that gets old really fast.

A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject.

 

[robert derrick]

No need to read all that Calvin wrote in his Institutes. It is quite clear from the EXACT quotations I have provided that Calvin was double-minded and playing theological games (to the detriment of everyone). And that is only the tip of the iceberg. Like I said, if a few drops of poison will kill you, you do not need drink the entire bottle. The sad fact is that Calvinists have been sucked into the lies, when his commentaries were presenting the truth.

So, I went to the tulip show, and only needed to read the paragraph headlines.

Saw the unconditional election title and closed the book.

There is only one unconditional relationship with God: sinners going on still in their sins will be destroyed by God.

God not doing so is conditioned on believing and obeying His Son in all things written in His doctrine of Scripture.

He that is our God is the God of salvation; and unto GOD the Lord belong the issues from death. But God shall wound the head of his enemies, and the hairy scalp of such an one as goeth on still in his trespasses.

From what I once read about Calvin and his movement in Switzerland, they certainly were not open sinners.

The problem is that false doctrine corrupts good manners more and more as it is passed on from generation to generation:

Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.

So that now we have a bunch of Tulips celebrating a filthy grace, and commanding every Christian everywhere to repent of righteous blameless living and sin again from time to time, in order to be really saved by grace through faith alone.

I say throw away the tulips and smell only the Rose of Sharon.

 

[PinSeeker]

No need to read all that Calvin wrote in his Institutes.”

Nobody is asking or expecting you to do that, Enoch. Only not to “cherry-pick” from even within the same passage, thereby making it seem that Calvin has said something quite different than what he did say. Such is unreasonable and either inadvertently or purposely ignorant, and if the latter, fanatical and, in your own words, playing games.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[PinSeeker]

So that now we have a bunch of Tulips celebrating a filthy grace, and commanding every Christian everywhere to repent of righteous blameless living and sin again from time to time, in order to be really saved by grace through faith alone.

LOL! No, but rather celebrating the fact that though we still, in this life, fall short of God’s glory, God has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to an inheritance that is imperishable, undefiled, and unfading, kept in heaven for us, who by God’s power are being guarded through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time (1 Peter 1).

and why has He done this for us? Well, because He is rich in mercy, because of the great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ ~ by grace we have been saved ~ and raised us up with Him and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, so that in the coming ages He might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. For by grace we have been saved through faith. And this is not our own doing; it is the gift of God (Ephesians 2).

I say throw away the tulips and smell only the Rose of Sharon.

LOL! Yeah, nothing compares to the Rose, but the tulips are worth smelling, too. God made them, and they reflect His glory. But hey, just be sure to “tiptoe through the tulips” (see what I did there?) rather than, well, tripping on them and, you know, falling flat on your face.

Grace and peace!

 

[robert derrick]

The first error of Calvin: Unconditional election.

Being 'elected' before ever being conceived, is the great error of Calvinism, that leads directly to being 'saved' sinners, whose souls are not accountable for their ongoing sins and trespasses.

 

[robert derrick]

Calvinism is based upon two main errors: The election of God for some souls prior to conception, and therefore the choosing of God for some souls without searching the hearts.

God does not foresee an action or condition on our part that induces Him to save us. Rather, election rests on God's sovereign decision to save whomever He is pleased to save.

This is the poisoned head of the serpent, that no doubt slithers through all the rest of Calvin's garbage.

And not only this; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac; (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth)

It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.

Calvin was carnal minded. He twisted the Scripture with a bent mind, that only sees the flesh, and not the heart.

Calvin went from one extreme to another: from being saved by our own works, to being pre-elected before we were ever conceived.

The choosing of Jacob over Esau was not about 'pre-electing' a soul before ever conceived by man, but about choosing faith in the heart over being firstborn of man: it foreshadows being made of the firstborn by God through faith, not by man through the flesh:

And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.

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.

Nothing was foreknown nor predetermined by God for any soul on earth, before it was ever conceived in the flesh.

The Scripture is about them that love God from the heart, and therefore are called of God, not them that God foresaw before they were ever seed in the flesh.

Unconditional pre-election does not acknowledge God searching and seeing the hearts of them that obey Him: it is so carnal minded, that it doesn't even require a soul to have a mind in this world.

The choosing of God in Scripture was not before they were conceived, but only after they were already struggling within the woman: God chose by seeing their hearts, while yet in the womb:

But the LORD said unto Samuel, Look not on his countenance, or on the height of his stature; because I have refused him: for the LORD seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the LORD looketh on the heart.

God no more 'pre-elected' Jacob before conception, than He chose David before he had a heart.

The only foreknowledge of God pertaining to the soul, is to see the hearts in the womb, and not one moment before.

 

[robert derrick]

Pre-election before conception is a lie of the devil.

According to Scripture, the election of God cannot be made before the soul is conceived, and the babe is in the womb, because there is no pre-existence of the soul of man: Adam was not made a living soul, until after his body was prepared for him on earth by God.

It is God who holds all souls in His hands, after they are conceived in the womb of a woman by the work of the Spirit of God.

Calvin was a carnal minded fool, and his degenerated offspring have reduced themselves to a bunch of pompous irresponsible and unaccountable pre-elected Jacob-boobs, who openly declare they have absolutely no responsibility for, nor accountability to their salvation, and so have no judgment for their sins to answer for, though willfully sinning time and again and again.

Afterall, they were specially and personally 'elected' and predetermined to be chosen, before they were ever a glint in their fathers' eyes and conceived in their mothers' wombs, much less before ever being born into the world, and even much less before ever believing God from the heart.

According to their doctrine, the rest of the poor un-pre-elected and never-to-be-chosen schmuck souls can just go to hell for all God cares.