When someone refuses to accept evidence as evidence there's nothing more to be said.
John Calvin and Calvinism.
- Thread starter Lifelong_sinner
- 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!
when someone blames someone for something, and that person did nothing wrong, theres nothing more to be said.
robert derrick
Well-Known Member
The problem is in admitting to an error in teaching vs admitting to an error of your whole life, and everything your conscience and soul is based upon.
I know what it is like, because I was compelled to do so decades ago in a ministry I found to be more and more dominating, with less and less care for the joy of the believers.
I had given up a career to be licensed in the ministry of that organization, and then it cost me my wife also.
Many of them are still there are locked in for life, because they are not willing to admit the error of a lifetime.
Others departed and left God completely, blaming Him for it.
Last edited:
The number one purpose IMHO for a forum like this is education. Growth in understanding. Fellowship among those who love the Lord. We all should strive for growth in our understanding. Many differences here are not tenants of our faith but many are critical to our full understanding of Gods will. I continue to learn.
robert derrick
Well-Known Member
Dittoes. Good correction only promotes better understanding of the truth and perfect the teaching of faith by Scripture.
I've been corrected recently in a very great way, and a lot of good things have come it. Scripture is much beautifully made than we give God credit for.
i see a problem with your logic. We are to have good doctrine, and to study and learn it. Good doctrine is key to not only teaching, but defending the faith. The problem is that this particular forum has more bad doctrine than good doctrine. You cannot take presbyterians, catholics, mormons, and pentecostals and mix them up to discuss a particular Biblical issue. You’ll never make progress like that.
I find that i can actually learn from forums with like minded people on it. There are forums out there that favor particular beliefs/ denominations where you could actually learn from. This forum is just for people to argue. If i want to learn, i’ll goto one of the puritan boards or reformed boards.
robert derrick
Well-Known Member
And so, you are here, why?
It shows how childish some people are. They come on to trash the forum, and yet they are always hanging around.
You love this forum. You get to run around calling someone a heretic and act like spoiled brat, in total anonymity.
I find that I can actually learn from forums with like minded people on it.
I.e. only get with people that agree with me, since being challenged with correction doesn't agree with me.
If i want to learn, i’ll goto one of the puritan boards or reformed boards.
Which is what I've noticed about OSAS on this site, they plainly state they will never be corrected, and will only believe what they want. They are not hear to learn anything, but only to falsely accuse everyone else a grace-hater, that doesn't bow down to their sinful way of thinking.
And so just who is making this forum so 'bad'?
I personally have learned many good things by correction on this site, because that is how God corrects His people, through one another:
And he went into the synagogue, and spake boldly for the space of three months, disputing and persuading the things concerning the kingdom of God.
And he began to speak boldly in the synagogue: whom when Aquila and Priscilla had heard, they took him unto them, and expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly.
Disputing in the Scriptures is what they did from the beginning to more perfectly know the doctrine of Christ.
The only ones who try to call it bad 'arguing' are them who hate correction and so are not honest with the Scriptures nor themselves, and so reduce themselves to name-calling and useless dribble.
as always, going after the calvinists seems to be your speciality.
Why am i here?? I ask myself that everyday. Some of the theology i see on here makes my head spin. But maybe you missed the part where i mentioned people of different faith arent ever going to agree on much. And this is why it is important to know your doctrine and be able to defend it. If someone comes on here, and is smarter than you, yet their theology is all wrong, are you going to change your mind?? I hope not. You always talk about being double minded, it seems you’re ok with it so long as its not a calvinist trying to change yours.
I am here to defend my beliefs, the reformed, 5 pt calvinist beliefs from people like you. I disagree with catholics quite a bit, but they couldnt be as wrong as you have been if they even tried.
The Bible, the Westminster confessions to include longer and short catechisms are what i believe. Im not going to change as i believe they are 100% Biblical and no change is necessary.
I can't speak for everyone but there is a difference in disagreement on doctrine and feelings toward those who you differ with. I have not hate or animosity towards those who I find I have a great divide in theology within the Protestant and Catholic denominations. I feel bad for some who I believe are missing the mark and I pray they open their eyes to sound scripture but I love my neighbors. Spirited debate somethings makes that less known I understand. Many of us are what I would call "solid in our beliefs" but desire to understand others views to better understand them. What we might not all realize is that many non Christians or new Christians are lurking without contributing to the debate. I have no mission on this forum to convert a Catholic or Calvinist or anyone else to my way of thinking. We can stand strong in our beliefs and try to understand others without compromising our beliefs. I can love someone without agreeing with them on every issue. My wife is a perfect example of that truth...
No, Enoch, it doesn't. John Calvin taught ~ and all good Calvinists know ~ that the atonement is limited in one sense (that it was only effectual for God's elect), and unlimited in a different sense (that it was sufficient to accomplish the salvation of all). This is perfectly logical and well-reasoned according to Scripture.
You, though, and folks of your mindset, just will not accept the former sense and are only willing to see the latter sense. That's not meant in any way to be an insult to your intelligence. It's kind of like looking at another person and thinking that because he's right-handed, he has no left arm.
Grace and peace to you.
Last edited:
Nope.
What you described is the general call of the Gospel to repent and believe. It goes to everyone, Jew and Gentile alike, an invitation to everyone without limit. All your Scripture citations are such.
But God and God only calls His elect by His Holy Spirit, and these are the ones who are reborn of the Spirit and that subsequently, because of the heart of flesh that they have been given (that has replaced the heart of stone), then come to repentance and belief. And this call, unlike the general call, is effectual without fail.
Grace and peace to you.
No, it sounds to me like at least in part that you are like the hyper-Calvinists.
Grace and peace to you.
Last edited:
Rudometkin
Active Member
John Calvin:
"Hence we maintain that, by His providence, not heaven and earth and inanimate creatures only, but also the counsels and wills of men are so governed as to move exactly in the course which He has destined."
Grace and peace to you as well.
Last edited:
Ah, then how do you understand what David says in Psalm 139, GG? Namely:
"Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me" (Psalm 51:5)
Augustine was right about this, and so was John Calvin, and so are all those that have come after.
No, man sins (and is culpable for that sin) because he is born with only the sinful nature, because he is descended from Adam, the federal head of the human race, who plunged humanity into this condition when he ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, documented in Genesis 3. God does not "predestinate (man) to sin," otherwise He Himself is capable of sin and even the author of sin, which is a blasphemy and absolutely not the case. As Jonathan Edwards wrote:
"If by ‘the author of sin,’ be meant the sinner, the agent, or the actor of sin, or the doer of a wicked thing... it would be a reproach and blasphemy, to suppose God to be the author of sin."
HOWEVER. Edwards does subsequently say ~ and he is right...
~ the following;"(God is) the permitter... of sin; and at the same time, a disposer of the state of events, in such a manner, for wise, holy and most excellent ends and purposes... If the sun were the proper cause of cold and darkness, it would be the fountain of these things, as it is the fountain of light and heat: and then something might be argued from the nature of cold and darkness, to a likeness of nature in the sun..."
In other words, sin is not the fruit of any positive agency or influence of the most High, but on the contrary, arises from the withholding of his action and energy, and under certain circumstances, necessarily follows on the want of his influence. What this means is that God wills things in two different senses. The Bible demands this by the way it speaks of God’s will in different ways. Edwards uses the terms “will of decree” and “will of command,” and explains that "(God’s) will of decree (or sovereign will) is not His will in the same sense as His will of command (or moral will) is."
Therefore it is not difficult at all to suppose that the one may be otherwise than the other: His will in both senses is His inclination. But when we say He wills virtue, or loves virtue or the happiness of His creature; thereby is intended that virtue or the creature’s happiness, absolutely and simply considered, is agreeable to the inclination of his nature. His will of decree is his inclination to a thing not as to that thing absolutely and simply, but with reference to the universality of things. So God, though he hates a things as it is simply, may incline to it with reference to the universality of things.
Wholeheartedly agree.
This perception ~ misperception ~ manifests itself among many only because those on the other side of the fence either don't understand or refuse to admit that in the Bible ~ like everywhere else ~ coins always have two sides, and not just one.
Grace and peace to you.
Last edited:
Hi Lifelong sinner,
Paul says in scripture we all know in part. I have met Calvinists who both do and do not think that, just as I have met Arminians who do and don't think that. The question for you is if we all know in part, is it possible that John Calvin only knew in part?
For the record, I believe Calvinists are my Brethren in Christ as one who is "Armenian" I also believe both sides, are right and wrong in their understanding. I Believe the big mistake of the reformation was casting out the distinction between the faithful and the saints, and as a result the Calvinist Armenian divide occurred. I Believe salvation is to all, but sainthood is by predestination, and the choice of God.... All the faithful are called to be saints, but few are chosen.
Thoughts?
Thank you for your thoughts. I assure you that we are on the same side regarding John Calvin.
I will still maintain, however, that you're taking Calvin's statements at least a bit beyond their context. In any case, it's not so easy a thing for us, in our finite minds, to fully comprehend. I wholeheartedly agree with Calvin's statement quoted above. I would say again that neither God's providence nor man's will can be soft-pedaled in favor of the other, because of at least two possible errors, namely not understanding well the following two Bible passages (among others):
"Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things. Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator... For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions... And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done."
[Paul, Romans 1, regarding non-elect persons]
[Paul, Romans 1, regarding non-elect persons]
"Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure."
[Paul again, Philippians 2, regarding God's elect, who "will and work for His good pleasure" because of God's work in them]
[Paul again, Philippians 2, regarding God's elect, who "will and work for His good pleasure" because of God's work in them]
Having said this, what we're discussing is analogous to the triune Godhead in the sense that, we can't really totally grasp ~ though we know it to be true ~ that the One True God exists eternally in three distinct Persons. Likewise, we can't really totally grasp ~ though we know it to be true ~ that God doesn't make our choices for us, but that our choice(s) are in the context of His.
Grace and peace to you, Rudometkin.
No time to post....Thank you for your thoughts. I assure you that we are on the same side regarding John Calvin.
I will still maintain, however, that you're taking Calvin's statements at least a bit beyond their context. In any case, it's not so easy a thing for us, in our finite minds, to fully comprehend. I wholeheartedly agree with Calvin's statement quoted above. I would say again that neither God's providence nor man's will can be soft-pedaled in favor of the other, because of at least two possible errors, namely not understanding well the following two Bible passages (among others):
"Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things. Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator... For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions... And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done."
[Paul, Romans 1, regarding non-elect persons]
"Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure."
[Paul again, Philippians 2, regarding God's elect, who "will and work for His good pleasure" because of God's work in them]
Having said this, what we're discussing is analogous to the triune Godhead in the sense that, we can't really totally grasp ~ though we know it to be true ~ that the One True God exists eternally in three distinct Persons. Likewise, we can't really totally grasp ~ though we know it to be true ~ that God doesn't make our choices for us, but that our choice(s) are in the context of His.
Grace and peace to you, Rudometkin.
But did want to say that it's
THREE PERSONS IN ONE GOD
Not
One God in three persons.
Soon...
Rudometkin
Active Member
Thank you for your thoughts. I assure you that we are on the same side regarding John Calvin.
I will still maintain, however, that you're taking Calvin's statements at least a bit beyond their context. In any case, it's not so easy a thing for us, in our finite minds, to fully comprehend. I wholeheartedly agree with Calvin's statement quoted above. I would say again that neither God's providence nor man's will can be soft-pedaled in favor of the other, because of at least two possible errors, namely not understanding well the following two Bible passages (among others):
"Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things. Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator... For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions... And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done."
[Paul, Romans 1, regarding non-elect persons]
"Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure."
[Paul again, Philippians 2, regarding God's elect, who "will and work for His good pleasure" because of God's work in them]
Having said this, what we're discussing is analogous to the triune Godhead in the sense that, we can't really totally grasp ~ though we know it to be true ~ that the One True God exists eternally in three distinct Persons. Likewise, we can't really totally grasp ~ though we know it to be true ~ that God doesn't make our choices for us, but that our choice(s) are in the context of His.
Grace and peace to you, Rudometkin.
I think when you say it's ridiculous, you have a problem with Calvinism.
John Calvin:
“The will of God is the chief and principal cause of all things.”
“What we must prove is that single events are ordered by God and that every event comes from his intended will. Nothing happens by chance.”
“But where it is a matter of men’s counsels, wills, endeavours, and exertions, there is greater difficulty in seeing how the providence of God rules here too, so that nothing happens but by His assent and that men can deliberately do nothing unless He inspire it.”
Okay, think what you want. I have no problem with that. Or Calvinism in general.
And I'm in perfect accord with what John Calvin has said here.
Grace and peace to you.
Similar threads
