7 point Calvinism

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I still don't see the difference in terms of Calvinism itself.

Calvinism itself does not hold Preservation as described in the article.

Calvinists do not view salvation as being mediated by the church.

The article is correct that most Calvinists hold to justification by faith alone (confusing justification with salvation). But this is not Calvinism (it is a doctrine of justification).

Some Calvinists affirm "double predestination", but most do not.

Calvinists differ on "absolute predestination".

I appreciate differences you mention, but they are not differences with Calvinism.


Also, the article confuses "Protestant" with coming from the RCC. Not all Protestants were members of the RCC (what made these Christians "Protestant" is that they opposed (or protested) RCC doctrine rather than embracing it.

That is why Anabaptists during the 15th and 16th century were Protestants even though they never were a part of the RCC.


It seems by reading materials online that Primitive Baptists do meet the definition of "Calvinist" as used by most Christians, but they do not meet their own definition.

What material on line specifically? And please don’t say Wikipedia!

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Did not answer the question. Just re-quoted the same website. That is not clear. Answer me for yourself. Do you believe that it is necessary to preach the gospel to unbelievers? Am I called to personally evangelize my neighbor?

Did Jesus say it was?

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

What material on line specifically? And please don’t say Wikipedia!

Maybe for reference you might want to go back into the archives and read some of Tom Cassady’s posts. As you know, Tom was a professing Particular Baptist and a pastor in San Diego California. Tom would never claim any association with Calvinists. I seem to remember his saying that they never studied Calvin nor put any store on Calvin, so why adopt his name. Toms emphasis was on Grace. And we PB’s would agree with Tom… someone I consider a valuable teacher.

 

[Piper]

Did Jesus say it was?

I believe that is what he was talking about in Matthew 28, or at least a part.
Does the bible teach that it is? Yes. A full understanding of how Matthew 28:19-20 is fulfilled requires us to work for the propagation of the gospel to individuals and nations.

Romans 10
How then will they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching? And how are they to preach unless they are sent? As it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news!”


Now, my question to you, Do you personally believe that is is part of your Christian duty to evangelize unbelievers?

Can you answer that question with a yes or no?

 

[JonC]

Then you do not understand PB’s or appreciate there utter revolution in being lumped in with Calvinists. Explain to me where you see PB’s as Calvinists.

I do appreciate their distain for being lumped in with Calvinism. But per their soteriology they are Calvinists.

I see Primitive Baptists as Calvinists because they hold the same doctrine insofar as salvation.

They (from what I have read) agree with Calvinists that men are not able to merit or earn salvation, nor can man turn to God apart from God drawing them.

They agree with Calvinists that God's choice in who to save us not conditioned on man.

They agree with Calvinists that Christ died to save only the elect (only those whom God chose to save as His people).

They agree with Calvinists that God's will in salvation is going to be accomplished.

They agree with Calvinists that God will keep those who He saves from being lost.

They also a view of the Atonement that was developed within Reformed churches.


This is not to ignore differenc s (there are differences) but Primitive Baptists developed from Calvinistic Baptist churches in the 19th Century (specifically over missions). The denomination was a reaction to Methodist influenced of the day (at that time the Methodist were the largest and most influential denomination).

 

[JonC]

What material on line specifically? And please don’t say Wikipedia!

The link you provided. I read the same thing across several PB sites, but it is wrong in that it completely misunderstands Calvinism as soteriology (it looks to one sect within historical Presbyterianism, but even here it missed the mark on their Ecclesiology).

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I believe that is what he was talking about in Matthew 28, or at least a part.
Does the bible teach that it is? Yes. A full understanding of how Matthew 28:19-20 is fulfilled requires us to work for the propagation of the gospel to individuals and nations.

Romans 10
How then will they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching? And how are they to preach unless they are sent? As it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news!”


Now, my question to you, Do you personally believe that is is part of your Christian duty to evangelize unbelievers?

Can you answer that question with a yes or no?

You already have your answer

Jesus also teaches that we are to wash the feet of the brethren so being compliant, we PB’ s we do what Jesus told us to do. So do you also follow the lord in his requests?

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

The link you provided. I read the same thing across several PB sites, but it is wrong in that it completely misunderstands Calvinism as soteriology (it looks to one sect within historical Presbyterianism, but even here it missed the mark on their Ecclesiology).

If not Presbyterians, what model do you prefer?

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I do appreciate their distain for being lumped in with Calvinism. But per their soteriology they are Calvinists.

I see Primitive Baptists as Calvinists because they hold the same doctrine insofar as salvation.

They (from what I have read) agree with Calvinists that men are not able to merit or earn salvation, nor can man turn to God apart from God drawing them.

They agree with Calvinists that God's choice in who to save us not conditioned on man.

They agree with Calvinists that Christ died to save only the elect (only those whom God chose to save as His people).

They agree with Calvinists that God's will in salvation is going to be accomplished.

They agree with Calvinists that God will keep those who He saves from being lost.

They also a view of the Atonement that was developed within Reformed churches.


This is not to ignore differenc s (there are differences) but Primitive Baptists developed from Calvinistic Baptist churches in the 19th Century (specifically over missions). The denomination was a reaction to Methodist influenced of the day (at that time the Methodist were the largest and most influential denomination).

We were there long before there were Calvinists…. Maybe they should get in line with us and become Old school Baptists. That would deflate their egos to be sure.

 

[JonC]

If not Presbyterians, what model do you prefer?

When we speak of Calvinism as soteriology it is the system Beza worked out through Calvin's work.

If we speak of historical Calvinism then we are talking about Presbyterian theology...BUT then "Calvinism" is addressing how Calvinists view Communion (as symbolic).

Luther coined the term "Calvinism" in response to Calvin's rejection of the idea Christ is present in a different way in Communion.

 

[JonC]

We were there long before there were Calvinists…. Maybe they should get in line with us and become Old school Baptists. That would deflate their egos to be sure.

No, you were not. Primitive Baptists began as an offshoot from general Baptists in the US. General Baptists were moving towards a Methodist type soteriology while the sect that would form Primitive Baptists held Presbyterian influences.

This is clear as Primitive Baptists hold John Calvin's theory of Atonement. Methodists do as well, as they came from the same Presbyterian traditions.

Now, if you want to belong to a pre-Reformation denomination that was never a part of the RCC and holds Baptist doctrine, you should look for a good Mennonite or Amish congregation (but be careful as many Mennonites have become more Reformed). There are Amish churches that will let you attend. But I don't think you can join. Not sure there.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

No, you were not. Primitive Baptists began as an offshoot from general Baptists in the US. General Baptists were moving towards a Methodist type soteriology while the sect that would form Primitive Baptists held Presbyterian influences.

This is clear as Primitive Baptists hold John Calvin's theory of Atonement. Methodists do as well, as they came from the same Presbyterian traditions.

Now, if you want to belong to a pre-Reformation denomination that was never a part of the RCC and holds Baptist doctrine, you should look for a good Mennonite or Amish congregation (but be careful as many Mennonites have become more Reformed). There are Amish churches that will let you attend. But I don't think you can join. Not sure there.

Why would I want to, I’m very happy where I am.

 

[JonC]

Why would I want to, I’m very happy where I am.

I don't know why you would. Just said if you did.

Are you still planning on moving?

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I don't know why you would. Just said if you did.

Are you still planning on moving?

Yes, hopefully closer to my grandkids but prices are crazy

 

[JonC]

Yes, hopefully closer to my grandkids but prices are crazy

Still south of NJ, I take it.

Prices are crazy.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Still south of NJ, I take it.

Prices are crazy.

Oh yeah. I think my wife is dragging her feet because her parents are sure to expire soon. She also want to move where there is good cancer care. My son and my grandkids are currently in Florida by Orlando… I’m not convinced it’s the area for us…. I like savanna Georgia and have been looking at Tennessee. I hope that interest rates will level off and real estate will drop to an affordable rate. But I ain’t getting younger.

 

[JonC]

Oh yeah. I think my wife is dragging her feet because her parents are sure to expire soon. She also want to move where there is good cancer care. My son and my grandkids are currently in Florida by Orlando… I’m not convinced it’s the area for us…. I like savanna Georgia and have been looking at Tennessee. I hope that interest rates will level off and real estate will drop to an affordable rate. But I ain’t getting younger.

Come to the Augusta area. It's a medical hub. 6 hrs. to Orlando (or a fairly cheap flight).

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Come to the Augusta area. It's a medical hub. 6 hrs. to Orlando (or a fairly cheap flight).

Haven’t looked there yet… thanks for the tip.

 

[Van]

Jokingly, I heard John Piper say this 20 years ago and say it about myself all the time.

The “sixth” point, double predestination, is simply the flip side of unconditional election. Just as God chooses whom he will save without regard to any distinctives in the person (Ephesians 1:5-6; Acts 13:48; Revelation 17:8), so also he decides whom he will not save without regard to any distinctives in the individual (John 10:26; 12:37-40; Romans 9:11-18; 1 Peter 2:7-8). By definition, the decision to elect some individuals to salvation necessarily implies the decision not to save those that were not chosen. God ordains not only that some will be rescued from his judgment, but that others will undergo that judgment.

This does not mean that someone might really want to be saved but then be rejected because they are on the wrong list. Rather, we are all dead in sin and unwilling to seek God on our own. A true, genuine desire for salvation in Christ is in fact a mark of election, and therefore none who truly come to Christ for salvation will be turned away (John 6:37-40).

So just as God doesn’t choose to save certain people because they are better than others (unconditional election), neither does he choose not to save certain people because they are worse than others (unconditional reprobation, or double predestination). Rather, everybody is lost in sin and no one has anything to recommend them to God above anyone else. And so from this mass of fallen humanity, God chooses to redeem some and leave others.

The “seventh” point, the best-of-all-possible worlds, means that God governs the course of history so that, in the long run, his glory will be more fully displayed and his people more fully satisfied than would have been the case in any other world. If we look only at the way things are now in the present era of this fallen world, this is not the best-of-all-possible worlds. But if we look at the whole course of history, from creation to redemption to eternity and beyond, and see the entirety of God’s plan, it is the best-of-all-possible plans and leads to the best-of-all-possible eternities. And therefore this universe (and the events that happen in it from creation into eternity, taken as a whole) is the best-of-all-possible-worlds.

1) Since Unconditional Election is unbiblical, the flip side, double predestination is likewise unbiblical.
2) The Seventh point is the "ends justify the means" demonic view cloaked in religious jargon.

Calvinism denies the premise "your faith has saved you."
Calvinism denies Paul spoke to unregenerate people using spiritual milk because they could understand and affirmatively respond.
Calvinism denies Christ laid down His life as a ransom for all, those to be saved and those never to be saved.
Calvinism denies unregenerate pole sought God and embraced to varying degrees the gospel of Christ.

God chose for salvation individuals utilizing their faith in the truth.
God chose for salvation individuals rich in faith and heirs to the kingdom promised to those who love Him.

 

[taisto]

1) Since Unconditional Election is unbiblical,

You lost me at this point.
You can have your election by virtue of merited works, but you won't find it in the Bible.