What Is Reformed Theology?

[Barry Johnson]

I don't really know, to be honest.

I just picked up the Bible 17 years ago and started really studying it deeply...
and someone told me about a year later that I was a "Calvinist" and that I was using something called, "Reformed Theology", which I never studied.

Strange...

literally not possible .

 

[Barry Johnson]

@Dave G,

It goes to prove that Reformed theology for the most part was the redisovery of Genuine Christian New Testament theology.

I differ on some details. So at best I would only be a two point Calvinist. T _ _ _ P.

I don't think its possible to become a Calvinist from reading only the bible. All 5 points are not biblical.

 

[Barry Johnson]

That would be some flavor of Prevenient (enabling) Grace ... God (does something) to empower all sinners to choose or reject Christ:

• The first of the two prominent positions on the doctrine of prevenient grace in classical Arminianism is that until the Gospel, the instrument by which God draws sinners to Himself, is presented to a sinner, the sinner is in complete bondage to sin. The Holy Spirit works with the presentation of the Gospel through teaching (John 6:45) and convicting (John 16:8) the sinner, enabling the sinner to respond in the exercising of saving faith in Christ. The Holy Spirit opens the heart (Acts 16:14) and mind (Luke 24:45) of the sinner, thus drawing the sinner to Christ (John 6:44, 12:32), and the sinner is then enabled to exercise his newly freed will in placing his faith in Christ for salvation. This falls in line with the biblical teaching that the natural man is unable to understand spiritual things (1 Corinthians 2:14; Romans 8:7-8), which would include the message of the Gospel. However, Arminians teach that, although the sinner is now enabled to place his faith in Christ, this enablement by no means guarantees that the sinner will actually do so. This contradicts the proclamation by Jesus that all those the Father gives to Him will come to Him (John 6:37). - [Got Questions]
• The second position is a bit more complicated than the first. In this position there is, essentially, a lesser and greater drawing via prevenient grace, which comes through the proclamation of the Gospel and the internal calling of God, sometimes referred to as the “full intensity” of prevenient grace. That is, God is drawing all men in a lesser sense and then drawing those who have the Gospel presented to them in another, greater sense. Some have called this latter drawing the dispensing of “particular prevenient grace.” In this position, God has given all men a prevenient grace that results in a universal healing of total depravity by the grace of God through the atoning work of Christ. This, in turn, has alleviated, though not fully, the corruption of inherited depravity. This position resembles what is sometimes called the “partial depravity” of Arminianism, since total depravity no longer describes what people are but rather what people were. That is, because of the atoning work of Christ, all people are no longer completely incapable of hearing and responding to the Gospel (John 6:44, 8:43); rather, all people have some ability. However, similar to the other position in classical Arminianism, people are not completely freed from their bondage of sin until the Gospel is presented to them and God calls them internally through its presentation. Arminius might have referred to this concept when he spoke of the “intermediate stage between being unregenerate and regenerate” while others have referred to people in this stage as “partially regenerated.” Since Arminians believe that regeneration logically comes after faith, when a person repents of his sin and exercises saving faith in Christ, then that person is “fully regenerated.” - [Got Questions]
• The last position on the doctrine of prevenient grace is that of the Wesleyans (also known as Wesleyan-Arminians). In this position, because of the first coming and atoning work of Christ, God has dispensed a universal prevenient grace that fully negates the depravity of man. Thus, man is now in a neutral state. Those who adhere to this position assert that because of Christ’s promises that speak of “all men” being drawn (John 12:32) and the “world” being convicted (John 16:8) after His sacrifice, it means that the prevenient grace we experience today was something purchased by Christ’s work on the cross. Since Wesleyans believe in unlimited atonement as opposed to limited atonement, Wesleyans then further state that when Paul speaks of God giving those whom Christ died for “all things” (Romans 8:32), this universal prevenient grace is one of those “all things.” - [Got Questions]

Grace is a ubiquitous reality, not a selective force. (Tit. 2:11-13)

Grace is just fine on it’s own as it’s found in scripture. Any modifier other than “free,” such as “sovereign,” “irresistible,” or “prevenient” indicate someone is either confused or attempting to confuse. (Rom. 3:24; 5:15; Jn. 1:16; Tit. 2:11-13)

”Die(d) to save” is not a Bible phrase or concept. It is therefore senseless to pit it against “died to make men savable” since the premise is false to start with. This false dichotomy indicates confusion about what saves.

 

[atpollard]

Grace is a ubiquitous reality, not a selective force. (Tit. 2:11-13)

[Titus 2:11-14 NASB] 11 For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men, 12 instructing us to deny ungodliness and worldly desires and to live sensibly, righteously and godly in the present age, 13 looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus, 14 who gave Himself for us to redeem us from every lawless deed, and to purify for Himself a people for His own possession, zealous for good deeds.​

I think the “grace of God” in that particular verse is a euphemism for Jesus Christ. It “appeared” and “brought salvation” and “instructed” ... which describes the ministry of Jesus from Birth to Ascension.

In any event, if it is not Jesus Christ, it really describes a “selective” rather than “ubiquitous” grace in those verses. All men without exception have not been instructed by “ubiquitous grace” to deny ungodliness and worldly desires. (If they were, there would be no ‘rainbow pride’ parades.)

 

[AustinC]

I don't think its possible to become a Calvinist from reading only the bible. All 5 points are not biblical.

Even though many many people have that testimony...

 

[atpollard]

I don't think its possible to become a Calvinist from reading only the bible. All 5 points are not biblical.

You would be wrong. I came to TU_IP while attending the Church of God (Wesleyan Arminian), never heard of Calvin and only later learned that what I believed was called Calvinism when someone at another church was explaining the difference between Calvinism and Arminianism. I had no opinion on Atonement because I never thought to wonder who else Jesus had died for. It was enough that He had died for me, so I gave it no further thought.

 

[Iconoclast]

Even though many many people have that testimony...

I did before I knew the term Calvinist.

 

[Barry Johnson]

Even though many many people have that testimony...

Its Post hoc rationalization. I witnessed this. They start off with a simple testimony, come into contact with reformed theology and all of a sudden their testimony begins to change to fit the paradigm.

 

[Barry Johnson]

You would be wrong. I came to TU_IP while attending the Church of God (Wesleyan Arminian), never heard of Calvin and only later learned that what I believed was called Calvinism when someone at another church was explaining the difference between Calvinism and Arminianism. I had no opinion on Atonement because I never thought to wonder who else Jesus had died for. It was enough that He had died for me, so I gave it no further thought.

But because Arminism is a branch of calvinistic thinking that makes some ripe for Calvinism. Many Churches end up being infultrated by Calvinsim because of this .

 

[Alan Gross]

Even though many many people have that testimony...

Including any number of people prior to Calvin.

 

[Alan Gross]

Its Post hoc rationalization. I witnessed this. They start off with a simple testimony, come into contact with reformed theology and all of a sudden their testimony begins to change to fit the paradigm.

This is a guess, as you know, and doesn't explain Job and Moses and everyone else who knew the Truth in The Bible, including Jesus, as well as, all who speak and teach the Truth since The Bible was completed and lived prior to Calvin.

Many men have written systematic Theologies that state Biblical Truth.

"Doth this offend you?"

Calvin didn't author The Bible.

People have departed from The Bible Teachings of The Truth, long before Calvin.

You just waited until this present era and are confused as to who wrote The Bible.

It sounds to me like God Offends you.

God doesn't say, "everyone knows what they are talking about".

"Doth this offend you?

62 "What if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where He was before?

63 "It is the spirit that giveth life {quickeneth}; the flesh profited nothing. The words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

64 "But there are some of you that believe not.

…67 "So Jesus asked the Twelve, “Do you want to leave too?”

68 "Simon Peter replied, “Lord, to whom would we go? You have the words of eternal life.

69 "We believe and know that You are the Holy One of God.”…

John 6

 

[AustinC]

Its Post hoc rationalization. I witnessed this. They start off with a simple testimony, come into contact with reformed theology and all of a sudden their testimony begins to change to fit the paradigm.

You are imagining an excuse for yourself to justify your false teaching.

 

[JD731]

This is a guess, as you know, and doesn't explain Job and Moses and everyone else who knew the Truth in The Bible, including Jesus, as well as, all who speak and teach the Truth since The Bible was completed and lived prior to Calvin.

Many men have written systematic Theologies that state Biblical Truth.

"Doth this offend you?"

Calvin didn't author The Bible.

People have departed from The Bible Teachings of The Truth, long before Calvin.

You just waited until this present era and are confused as to who wrote The Bible.

It sounds to me like God Offends you.

God doesn't say, "everyone knows what they are talking about".

"Doth this offend you?

62 "What if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where He was before?

63 "It is the spirit that giveth life {quickeneth}; the flesh profited nothing. The words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

64 "But there are some of you that believe not.

…67 "So Jesus asked the Twelve, “Do you want to leave too?”

68 "Simon Peter replied, “Lord, to whom would we go? You have the words of eternal life.

69 "We believe and know that You are the Holy One of God.”…

John 6

If Jesus has the words of eternal life, why do we need words like irresistible grace when there are no words like that in the scriptures? Why do we need words like sovereign grace? Why do we need words like limited atonement, unconditional election, perseverance of the saints, original sin, covenant of grace, the gift of faith, covenant of law, total depravity, or why do we need the word depravity at all? The word sovereignty, not a bible word or concept that God wants to put forth. Why do we need doctrines that teach grace alone, when salvation in the scriptures has words that say that salvation is by "grace" through "faith?" Why do we have less than honest people declaring that faith is a work when the scriptures says words like "But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness" thus setting faith and works as contrasts. Are we to think people who make such awkward claims are the smartest people in the room and ones whose teaching we should trust our eternal souls to. And what about infused faith to believe the gospel when the scripture words say in Rom 4 that "16 Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace;" the "it in the context being righteousness that the law of God requires when the Calvinists would change the message to" by grace that it might be by faith" with the perversion they espouse. Calvinism tells us that we have access to faith by grace when in fact the words of scripture says we have "access by grace into faith" in Rom 5 where we are told in verse 2 that, "by whom (Jesus Christ) also we have "access by faith into this grace" wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God, which is just the opposite of the words of the Calvinists.

What is offensive to some of us is that Calvinists thinks it is a badge of intellectual brilliance to teach that people are born with intelligence, reason, and will and can make decisions on anything that involves their futures and their lives with the one exception of whether they will trust the words of scriptures that invites sinners to come to God through faith in Christ and receive eternal life, who is Christ in us in the person of the Holy Spirit, the same Spirit who is in him. What kind of thinking is this? Who, living in the real world and having knowledge of the realities of life and death, could be convinced of such a thing?

These reasons and many others is why I oppose this religion as a false system and understand that it is in existence because it does not accept the words of scriptures and adds to them it's own expressions that changes biblical truths.

 

[atpollard]

But because Arminism is a branch of calvinistic thinking that makes some ripe for Calvinism. Many Churches end up being infiltrated by Calvinsim because of this .

You should read what the Church of God of Anderson Indiana believes and teaches. It is good stuff. It just did not agree with my personal experience of how I was saved, so I kept reading scripture to find answers that did fit with my empirical experiences.

 

[Alan Gross]

What is offensive to some of us is that Calvinists thinks it is a badge of intellectual brilliance to teach that people are born with intelligence, reason, and will and can make decisions on anything that involves their futures and their lives with the one exception of whether they will trust the words of scriptures that invites sinners to come to God through faith in Christ and receive eternal life, who is Christ in us in the person of the Holy Spirit, the same Spirit who is in him. What kind of thinking is this? Who, living in the real world and having knowledge of the realities of life and death, could be convinced of such a thing?

Christ is not in 'us' in the Person of The Holy Spirit unless a soul is Saved.

That lost soul is dead and going to Hell, with no Hope,
unless God Saves them by an Act of His Will.

That is How God Says He Saves lost souls that would Go to Hell, otherwise.

And that offends you.

God.

What kind of thinking is this?

Your 'thinking' is with a sin-cursed mind that is offended, by God.

That is only natural.

You have natural 'knowledge' of the realities of life and death.

God is Spirit and they that Worship Him must Worship Him in Spirit and in Truth.

 

[37818]

I don't think its possible to become a Calvinist from reading only the bible. All 5 points are not biblical.

The terminology is not. But then neither are the terms eternal Sonship or Trinity.. Now even though I do not agree with R. C. Sproul on some points, he did use a few Scriptures for his understanding of the 5 points, in his book I read.

It is my understanding R. C. Sproul was coverted from Arminianism to Calvinism based on Scripture.

 

[Barry Johnson]

The terminology is not. But then neither are the terms eternal Sonship or Trinity.. Now even though I do not agree with R. C. Sproul on some points, he did use a few Scriptures for his understanding of the 5 points, in his book I read.

It is my understanding R. C. Sproul was coverted from Arminianism to Calvinism based on Scripture.

Every Arminain is primed to become a Calvinist. Because the Theology stems from Calvinism.

 

[Barry Johnson]

Christ is not in 'us' in the Person of The Holy Spirit unless a soul is Saved.

That lost soul is dead and going to Hell, with no Hope,
unless God Saves them by an Act of His Will.

That is How God Says He Saves lost souls that would Go to Hell, otherwise.

And that offends you.

God.

What kind of thinking is this?

Your 'thinking' is with a sin-cursed mind that is offended, by God.

That is only natural.

You have natural 'knowledge' of the realities of life and death.

God is Spirit and they that Worship Him must Worship Him in Spirit and in Truth.

Its God's will and it PLEASES him to save all those who believe him . simple .

 

[37818]

Every Arminain is primed to become a Calvinist. Because the Theology stems from Calvinism.

That, I think, shoild be s good topic for a thread.

 

[JD731]

Christ is not in 'us' in the Person of The Holy Spirit unless a soul is Saved.

Read that statement again and note how much sense it doesn't make. Christ came to save saved people, you say? Do you know that salvation is the new birth? You fellows who subscribe to Calvinism are on here trying to defend the system of Calvin. If a person is born into the family of God by the Spirit, why does he need to be saved? He is saved by the fact that he has the Spirit in him, who is God.

I am flabbergasted of how little you men know about the Christian faith.

That lost soul is dead and going to Hell, with no Hope,
unless God Saves them by an Act of His Will.

That is How God Says He Saves lost souls that would Go to Hell, otherwise.

And that offends you.

God.

What kind of thinking is this?

Your 'thinking' is with a sin-cursed mind that is offended, by God.

That is only natural.

You have natural 'knowledge' of the realities of life and death.

God is Spirit and they that Worship Him must Worship Him in Spirit and in Truth.

A sinner is dead because of his sin. This means he is separated from God. This does not mean he cannot think and reason and act. When he through these attributes he has been given by God considers that God has made a way to cleanse him from his sin and hears his promise of forgiveness and eternal fellowship with him and believes what he promises enough to repent of his sins (that means to turn from them and turn to a holy God) and believe in Christ who suffered the punishment of God for them, then God will give him his righteousness that he does not have, which is the righteousness of Christ, who is the Spirit of God and Christ. That is the truth of the matter and you can choose to pervert that gospel if you will but I warn you there is a penalty for it.

It is best to repent.