Just what are you?

[quantumfaith]

It strikes me just how much some of you misunderstand these positions. There, literally, is no way to be somewhere along the continuum of theological position between one extreme and the other. Not accepting the label that goes with the position is fine, I'm in that camp myself, but I know where I stand in regards to position.

Those positions are all-encompassing. A position #6 would be pagan or absolutely un-believing.

glfrederick

with all due respect, I do not think anything nefarious was intended by introducing #6, simply a way for someone to express that they do not think any of the labels "sufficiently" or "efficiently" describes themselves.

 

[glfredrick]

glfrederick

with all due respect, I do not think anything nefarious was intended by introducing #6, simply a way for someone to express that they do not think any of the labels "sufficiently" or "efficiently" describes themselves.

I get that, but labels aside, the levels of theology expressed in that chart of positions takes into account every possible theology.

Like I said, I understand why one would not want to identify with the label, but we're not really concerned about the labels are we? (Some apparently are!) The issue is that there are theological positions behind those labels and merely identifying where one falls on that scale is no big deal. It does not mean that one identifies with the label, but then, I wonder why it would be a problem. After all, if that is your position, own it.

 

[Jarthur001]

There is an Idea....can we do that James Arthur? Erasmus was a humanist thus a Humanism! Or Bach played the organ, thus an organism (or maybe organist) Ah!

Or ID thru Scripture like:

Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree." Galatians 3:13 :saint:

I know this was a joke, but many do believe that Erasmus was the father of Humanism that we see today.

 

[Jarthur001]

1. Non Calvinist
2. Non-determinist
3. Sprinkle of Synergism, *
4. Dash of molinism
5. Tidbit of Arminianism

Did I leave anything offensive out, excluding "open theism"?

Hello QF,

I want to ask you something. You speak negative and forceful about Calvinism and determinist, but rather comforting, soft and quiet with sprinkles of hyper-Arminianism.

Would it be fair to say that you are closer to them, as as far away from Calvinist as you can get?

 

[Amy.G]

Enjoy!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hth7GzAoXos

Awesome!

"of all the earth and skies above, you're the one He madly loves....enough to die".

 

[Amy.G]

The only label I'm willing to bear is that of Christ. All the ism's matter not to me. It is only mans attempt to understand God.

 

[Jarthur001]

I was asked about Amyraldianism and why it is not in the list. If someone wants to be called this, they may as well come forward with all other views. I did think about placing this in the mix, but must have never held of it.

Amyraldianism is said to be 4 point Calvinist. They hold to what they call a "Hypothetical universalism".

I would like to share my views on this. If you have read Amyraut the one that wrote this doctrine, I believe you will find a 5 point Calvinist trying to make others believe in some of Calvinism. Those that hold to this few, and there are a number that do, never talk about it. But what Amyraldianism allows them to do is say when they preach.."God loves every person."

In some way this makes them feel better.

But as I said, it is my feeling that this is a mild 5 point lapsarianist Calvinist at its core. They are not bold in their theology and wish not to be laled anything. This is one reason you never hear people claiming to be one.

There are many out there

Anyway...If you are one...sure go right ahead and tell us.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I know this was a joke, but many do believe that Erasmus was the father of Humanism that we see today.

Not Allan & he asked some pretty good questions that you've not addressed.

1st are these guys professing Free Will Doctrine the same as Arminians.

2nd are RC's doctrines the same as todays Free Will Believers? Erasmus was an agent for the RC Popes so shouldn't their theologies match?

You haven't addressed any of these concerns dear brother.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I was asked about Amyraldianism and why it is not in the list. If someone wants to be called this, they may as well come forward with all other views. I did think about placing this in the mix, but must have never held of it.

Amyraldianism is said to be 4 point Calvinist. They hold to what they call a "Hypothetical universalism".

I would like to share my views on this. If you have read Amyraut the one that wrote this doctrine, I believe you will find a 5 point Calvinist trying to make others believe in some of Calvinism. Those that hold to this few, and there are a number that do, never talk about it. But what Amyraldianism allows them to do is say when they preach.."God loves every person."

In some way this makes them feel better.

But as I said, it is my feeling that this is a mild 5 point lapsarianist Calvinist at its core. They are not bold in their theology and wish not to be laled anything. This is one reason you never hear people claiming to be one.

There are many out there

Anyway...If you are one...sure go right ahead and tell us.

I would say that thats my own brothers view

 

[Jarthur001]

1st I want to say..and this may shock you...I am a 5 point Calvinist.

I use to hide from the word, but people always called me that, so now i use the word and even call myself a Calvinist when I preach and write columns.

One thing that I wish I had said before, because I indeed knew this would happen, is that non-calvinist do not want to be labeled anything. This is what we have seen here...i'm not this...i'm not that...lets all start new names.....i have pinch of this...i just follow Christ...i just read the Bible....i'm just a poor old farm boy....i'm just a rapper that loves Jesus.

This could be ture, but these things can be said by all believers. The fact is, even if you do not like a label everyone...yes everyone comes close to one of the labels on the list.

Does any non-Calvinist mind sharing? Are they ashamed of what you believe? Please do not be. Make the call and be proud of your faith. Start a new label like someone said we should, if that is indeed your desire. But please tell us what that label stands for.

Yes we are all Christians. But we share words toward each other that is hateful at times. If you can share with others what you believe, this is the time.

 

[Jarthur001]

Not Allan & he asked some pretty good questions that you've not addressed.

1st are these guys professing Free Will Doctrine the same as Arminians.

2nd are RC's doctrines the same as todays Free Will Believers? Erasmus was an agent for the RC Popes so shouldn't their theologies match?

You haven't addressed any of these concerns dear brother.

yes...well about Allan. send him a message and ask him. Tell him I said it was fine to tell you.

 

[Jarthur001]

yes...well about Allan. send him a message and ask him. Tell him I said it was fine to tell you.

Ok..this is not fair to leave this post without saying something.

I started two threads, which caused many non-Calvinist to cry.."NOT FAIR".

Those threads were on the Roman Church and Humanism

What happened...or I believe what happened that is, ..is that SOME saw themselves in the post. Like a looking in a mirror they saw what they held as the same as what a grup they do not like held as well.

That is the doctrines held by humanist and the Roman church was talked about, and they didn't like it, because they held this too. Now I must admit that at first this was not the intent on the humanist thread...which was also looking at Arminianism...which every one but one person runs from and says they are not...but I noticed I had found something and therefore started the Roman Church thread.

Allan pushed me to a place where I nearly had to say something, but I sent him a message telling him, and he gave me his word he would not say anything.

Many did not like what they saw, even when it was talking about OTHERS that they say they are not.

I hope this helps.

James

 

[quantumfaith]

Hello QF,

I want to ask you something. You speak negative and forceful about Calvinism and determinist, but rather comforting, soft and quiet with sprinkles of hyper-Arminianism.

Would it be fair to say that you are closer to them, as as far away from Calvinist as you can get?

I am, your favorite "perjorative" a "free willer", not to be confused with the movie of a similar name. I do not "like" the reformed doctrines of

1. Total Depravity
2. Unconditional Election
3. Limited Atonement
4. Irrisistible Grace


Do I share at least some "commonalities" with any of these, certainly. What I fail to appreciate even more is "attitude of presentation" demonstrated by the confirmed reformers.

So, all in all, I would have to answer your question, Yes....to both.

 

[Jarthur001]

I am, your favorite "perjorative" a "free willer", not to be confused with the movie of a similar name. I do not "like" the reformed doctrines of

1. Total Depravity
2. Unconditional Election
3. Limited Atonement
4. Irrisistible Grace


Do I share at least some "commonalities" with any of these, certainly. What I fail to appreciate even more is "attitude of presentation" demonstrated by the confirmed reformers.

So, all in all, I would have to answer your question, Yes....to both.

I'll take that Thanks QF


Peace....James

 

[quantumfaith]

I'll take that Thanks QF


Peace....James

Mercy, Peace and Love in Abundance.

(man that was hard) (sarcasm)

 

[glfredrick]

I am, your favorite "perjorative" a "free willer", not to be confused with the movie of a similar name. I do not "like" the reformed doctrines of

1. Total Depravity
2. Unconditional Election
3. Limited Atonement
4. Irrisistible Grace


Do I share at least some "commonalities" with any of these, certainly. What I fail to appreciate even more is "attitude of presentation" demonstrated by the confirmed reformers.

So, all in all, I would have to answer your question, Yes....to both.

Why does it always seem to come down to "attitude?" That is not the reason to accept or reject a doctrine!

I'm also sort of wondering why anyone claiming Calvinism would have an "attitude" (though I know some do)? The primary tenet of the DoG is that GOD DOES IT ALL. How do we gain an attitude from that?

Perhaps the real "attitude" comes from a perspective that suggests that humans "smart" enough to "choose Christ" are better than those who admit that they are born dead in their sin and trespasses, and that had God not drawn and made possible justification by grace alone, or we have no hope at all...

We've had a lot of discussions about the issue, but it all comes down to one or two very basic points. We are either born in sin, and can do nothing or we are born "sick" and just have to reach out to God. Either God reaches us or we reach Him. The entirety of any position right of Arminianism stipulates that salvation is all God, and that without God's grace there would be no salvation. It is the semi-Pelagian and Pelagian positions that say that human effort is enough to reach God.

Seeing as how Semi-Pelagianism and Pelagianism are well-known heresies, no one wants to take those labels, but there are many who would answer diagnostic questions as to their beliefs in that manner even if they disavow the label.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

yes...well about Allan. send him a message and ask him. Tell him I said it was fine to tell you.

Im getting permission from you now? Why dont you publicaly address it.....or does that diminish the punch line? :smilewinkgrin:

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Why does it always seem to come down to "attitude?" That is not the reason to accept or reject a doctrine!

I'm also sort of wondering why anyone claiming Calvinism would have an "attitude" (though I know some do)? The primary tenet of the DoG is that GOD DOES IT ALL. How do we gain an attitude from that?

Perhaps the real "attitude" comes from a perspective that suggests that humans "smart" enough to "choose Christ" are better than those who admit that they are born dead in their sin and trespasses, and that had God not drawn and made possible justification by grace alone, or we have no hope at all...

Ever heard of God's Permissive Will?

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Here is another one....guess my Theology. OK?

“You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit and that your fruit should abide, so that whatever you ask the Father in my name, he may give it to you.” -John 15:16

 

[Amy.G]

Here is another one....guess my Theology. OK?

“You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit and that your fruit should abide, so that whatever you ask the Father in my name, he may give it to you.” -John 15:16

You're an apostle?

Apostle-ite? Apostle-ist?