• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Who is a Calvinist?

Salty

20,000 Posts Club
Administrator
Are you a Calvinist? (there was multiple adds on the linked page )
Are you an Arminian and dont even know it?

I do wonder why some do not want to be call an Arminian or a Calvinist

This discussion should be limited as to why you are one or the other - or a combination.
and YES, "I don't know" is acceptable when applicable!
PLEASE do not complain about the shortcomings of the other side.
Lets keep this a very informative and civil discussion!


What a Calvinist believes

1. Total Depravity​

This belief posits that as a result of the Fall of Man, every aspect of humanity is tainted by sin. Thus, humans are incapable of coming to God without divine intervention. This perspective emphasizes that salvation is entirely God’s work.

2. Unconditional Election​

Calvinists believe that God has chosen, or elected, certain individuals for salvation without any conditions based on foreseen merit. This notion highlights God’s sovereignty in the salvation process.

3. Limited Atonement​

This principle states that Jesus Christ’s sacrificial death was intended specifically for the elect, ensuring their salvation. In contrast, some other Christian teachings argue for a general atonement available to all.

4. Irresistible Grace​

Calvinists assert that God’s grace to save a person cannot be resisted when it is extended. This belief underscores the notion that individuals are drawn to Christ through a powerful divine call.

5. Perseverance of the Saints​

Lastly, Calvinism teaches that those whom God has chosen will persevere in faith until the end. This assurance reinforces the belief in the stability and certainty of salvation for believers.


and extra;

Political Implications​

The tenets of Calvinism also influenced concepts of governance and civil responsibility. Calvinists were integral in advocating for democratic principles, promoting the idea that civil authority should reflect God’s justice.

Calvinism in Comparison to Other Protestant Traditions​

When discussing what a Calvinist believes, it’s crucial to understand how it compares to other branches of Protestantism, such as Arminianism. Unlike Calvinism’s deterministic approach, Arminianism
emphasizes human free will in accepting grace, providing an interesting anthropological divergence.

Comparatively, what is a Calvinist’s doctrine of predestination has sparked debates over free will in salvation. These differences highlight the diverse interpretations of scripture across denominations.

Calvinism vs. Arminianism​

  • Predestination: Calvinists hold to unconditional election; Arminians believe in conditional election based on faith.
  • Grace: In Calvinism, grace is irresistible; in Arminianism, one can resist divine grace.
  • Salvation: Calvinists affirm the perseverance of the saints, while Arminians hold that one can fall from grace.

Conclusion​

Understanding what is a Calvinist opens up a wealth of theological insight and community dynamics. Relying on the doctrines established by John Calvin, Calvinists celebrate the sovereignty of God, the necessity of grace, and the assurance of salvation. Through practical application and community engagement, the teachings of Calvinism can enrich personal faith and foster a deeper connection to the broader Christian community.

There is much more on the link - click here for the link
(The main reason I copy and paste was that there was multiple adds on the linked page
 

Salty

20,000 Posts Club
Administrator
This Table is from this link

ArminianismCalvinism
Free Will or Human AbilityTotal Inability or Total Depravity
Conditional ElectionUnconditional Election
Universal Redemption or General AtonementLimited Atonement or Particular Redemption
The Holy Spirit Can be Effectually ResistedIrresistible Grace or The Efficacious Call of the Spirit
Falling from GracePerseverance of the Saints
 

Van

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I am a one point Calvinist, but my point 5 doctrine is Preservation of the Saints based on 1 Peter 1:3-5.

I am a quasi two point Arminian, as I believe Christ died as a ransom for all people, 1 Timothy 2:6, and in Conditional Election, God choosing those who believe. I say "quasi" because I believe God chooses individuals for salvation during their physical lifetime, not before creation.

As to the points I believe that conflict with both Arminianism and Calvinism:
1) I believe lost unregenerate people can seek God and understand some spiritual things, the spiritual milk Paul used to speak to lost, unregenerate people. 1 Corinthians 3:1.

2) I do not believe lost unregenerate people need to be "enabled" in order to seek God or trust in Christ, see point one. Matthew 23:13 teaches lost people are able to be actually entering the kingdom, but can then be prevented by false teachings.

3) I believe the future is not fixed, i.e. totally predestined by God, but only partly predestined and partly open to alteration due to chance and human autonomous choice. Hebrews 11 teaches us of many historical events that were altered by the human choices of people "by faith" and not by predestined faithfulness.

4) I believe once God transfers a person into Christ, where they are born anew and sealed in Christ forever, they are saved forever and cannot lose their salvation or inheritance of eternal life. John 3:16.
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
I am neither.

The reason is I believe Calvin made a serious error long before Calvinists articulated the Five Articles and were declared unorthodox by other Calvinists who articulated the Canons of Dort in response. Both Calvinism and Arminianism are fruits of the same error. My disagreement with both happens long before TULIP or the Five Articles come into play.
 

cjab

Member
I believe Calvin was a poor theologian, being more of a commentator on the theology of others than an original theologian. This is partly why he appears to contradict himself on key points, as also does Augustine, his hero. Sometimes Calvin appears as incoherent in the same paragraph, as he does in his commentary on 1 John 2:2.

On 1 John 2:2 ("Jesus Christ is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world"), Calvin affirms in his commentary: "Christ suffered sufficiently for the whole world, but efficiently only for the elect. This solution has commonly prevailed in the schools. Though then I allow that what has been said is true......" suggesting that propitiation for sin (as opposed to salvation) isn't limited to select persons.

Yet he appears to flatly contradicts this when he re-iterates his "other" well-known position: "[I believe] the design of John was no other than to make this benefit common to the whole Church" and that by whole, "[John] does not include the reprobate, but designates those who should believe as well as those who were then scattered through various parts of the world."

His latter position is deeply problematic, for if it was correct, no evangelist could ever truthfully say to an unsaved person, "Christ died for your sins," and many would spend their lives unsure of whether Christ did die for their sins.

So I find this baptistpress article to be unduly favorable to Calvin when it states without equivocation: "John Calvin discounted limited atonement, and Richard Baxter, John Bunyan, Jonathan Edwards and Andrew Fuller are just a few of history’s well-known Calvinists who likewise rejected this position."

I suggest John Calvin sat on the fence on limited atonement, embracing contradictory positions simultaneously, which is why I don't credit him as a serious theologian.
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
I suggest John Calvin sat on the fence on limited atonement, embracing contradictory positions simultaneously, which is why I don't credit him as a serious theologian.
To be fair to Calvin, the scope of the Atonement was an issue that grew out of his theology but also one that came about after his death. Calvin did not place divine sovereignty under soteriology (that was Beza, who followed Calvin).
 

Charlie24

Well-Known Member
Are you a Calvinist? (there was multiple adds on the linked page )
Are you an Arminian and dont even know it?

I do wonder why some do not want to be call an Arminian or a Calvinist

This discussion should be limited as to why you are one or the other - or a combination.
and YES, "I don't know" is acceptable when applicable!
PLEASE do not complain about the shortcomings of the other side.
Lets keep this a very informative and civil discussion!


What a Calvinist believes

1. Total Depravity​

This belief posits that as a result of the Fall of Man, every aspect of humanity is tainted by sin. Thus, humans are incapable of coming to God without divine intervention. This perspective emphasizes that salvation is entirely God’s work.

2. Unconditional Election​

Calvinists believe that God has chosen, or elected, certain individuals for salvation without any conditions based on foreseen merit. This notion highlights God’s sovereignty in the salvation process.

3. Limited Atonement​

This principle states that Jesus Christ’s sacrificial death was intended specifically for the elect, ensuring their salvation. In contrast, some other Christian teachings argue for a general atonement available to all.

4. Irresistible Grace​

Calvinists assert that God’s grace to save a person cannot be resisted when it is extended. This belief underscores the notion that individuals are drawn to Christ through a powerful divine call.

5. Perseverance of the Saints​

Lastly, Calvinism teaches that those whom God has chosen will persevere in faith until the end. This assurance reinforces the belief in the stability and certainty of salvation for believers.


and extra;

Political Implications​

The tenets of Calvinism also influenced concepts of governance and civil responsibility. Calvinists were integral in advocating for democratic principles, promoting the idea that civil authority should reflect God’s justice.

Calvinism in Comparison to Other Protestant Traditions​

When discussing what a Calvinist believes, it’s crucial to understand how it compares to other branches of Protestantism, such as Arminianism. Unlike Calvinism’s deterministic approach, Arminianism
emphasizes human free will in accepting grace, providing an interesting anthropological divergence.

Comparatively, what is a Calvinist’s doctrine of predestination has sparked debates over free will in salvation. These differences highlight the diverse interpretations of scripture across denominations.

Calvinism vs. Arminianism​

  • Predestination: Calvinists hold to unconditional election; Arminians believe in conditional election based on faith.
  • Grace: In Calvinism, grace is irresistible; in Arminianism, one can resist divine grace.
  • Salvation: Calvinists affirm the perseverance of the saints, while Arminians hold that one can fall from grace.

Conclusion​

Understanding what is a Calvinist opens up a wealth of theological insight and community dynamics. Relying on the doctrines established by John Calvin, Calvinists celebrate the sovereignty of God, the necessity of grace, and the assurance of salvation. Through practical application and community engagement, the teachings of Calvinism can enrich personal faith and foster a deeper connection to the broader Christian community.

There is much more on the link - click here for the link
(The main reason I copy and paste was that there was multiple adds on the linked page

I joke around from time to time saying that I'm a 1 point Calvinist. I believe man is totally depraved, Isaiah and Paul made that very clear.

I reject the other 4 points as I see myself responsible before God for my actions, I chose of my own free will to believe and serve Him.

It's obvious to me, and the main reason I reject those 4 points, the Calvinists has no responsibility to God.

They didn't choose God, they had nothing to do with it. They are under no obligation, God bears the responsibility and obligation to them by choosing them.

God imputes to them their every move, how is it possible they are not robots?

I won't argue this, only giving the reasons why I'm not a Calvinist.
 

JesusFan

Well-Known Member
I am neither.

The reason is I believe Calvin made a serious error long before Calvinists articulated the Five Articles and were declared unorthodox by other Calvinists who articulated the Canons of Dort in response. Both Calvinism and Arminianism are fruits of the same error. My disagreement with both happens long before TULIP or the Five Articles come into play.
So what do you hold to, as Calvinism makes perfect sense to those of us jere who hold to us now being found in Adam spiritually dead, and whose only hope would be via the Atonement provided for us thru and by ther Cross of Christ?
 

JesusFan

Well-Known Member
I joke around from time to time saying that I'm a 1 point Calvinist. I believe man is totally depraved, Isaiah and Paul made that very clear.

I reject the other 4 points as I see myself responsible before God for my actions, I chose of my own free will to believe and serve Him.

It's obvious to me, and the main reason I reject those 4 points, the Calvinists has no responsibility to God.

They didn't choose God, they had nothing to do with it. They are under no obligation, God bears the responsibility and obligation to them by choosing them.

God imputes to them their every move, how is it possible they are not robots?

I won't argue this, only giving the reasons why I'm not a Calvinist.
We calvinists woudl agree with you view on this form of Calvinism that you are reacting against, as we do not hold to that form either
 

JesusFan

Well-Known Member
I believe Calvin was a poor theologian, being more of a commentator on the theology of others than an original theologian. This is partly why he appears to contradict himself on key points, as also does Augustine, his hero. Sometimes Calvin appears as incoherent in the same paragraph, as he does in his commentary on 1 John 2:2.

On 1 John 2:2 ("Jesus Christ is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world"), Calvin affirms in his commentary: "Christ suffered sufficiently for the whole world, but efficiently only for the elect. This solution has commonly prevailed in the schools. Though then I allow that what has been said is true......" suggesting that propitiation for sin (as opposed to salvation) isn't limited to select persons.

Yet he appears to flatly contradicts this when he re-iterates his "other" well-known position: "[I believe] the design of John was no other than to make this benefit common to the whole Church" and that by whole, "[John] does not include the reprobate, but designates those who should believe as well as those who were then scattered through various parts of the world."

His latter position is deeply problematic, for if it was correct, no evangelist could ever truthfully say to an unsaved person, "Christ died for your sins," and many would spend their lives unsure of whether Christ did die for their sins.

So I find this baptistpress article to be unduly favorable to Calvin when it states without equivocation: "John Calvin discounted limited atonement, and Richard Baxter, John Bunyan, Jonathan Edwards and Andrew Fuller are just a few of history’s well-known Calvinists who likewise rejected this position."

I suggest John Calvin sat on the fence on limited atonement, embracing contradictory positions simultaneously, which is why I don't credit him as a serious theologian.
He was perhaps the greatest non inspired theologian who ever lived though
 

JesusFan

Well-Known Member
I am a one point Calvinist, but my point 5 doctrine is Preservation of the Saints based on 1 Peter 1:3-5.

I am a quasi two point Arminian, as I believe Christ died as a ransom for all people, 1 Timothy 2:6, and in Conditional Election, God choosing those who believe. I say "quasi" because I believe God chooses individuals for salvation during their physical lifetime, not before creation.

As to the points I believe that conflict with both Arminianism and Calvinism:
1) I believe lost unregenerate people can seek God and understand some spiritual things, the spiritual milk Paul used to speak to lost, unregenerate people. 1 Corinthians 3:1.

2) I do not believe lost unregenerate people need to be "enabled" in order to seek God or trust in Christ, see point one. Matthew 23:13 teaches lost people are able to be actually entering the kingdom, but can then be prevented by false teachings.

3) I believe the future is not fixed, i.e. totally predestined by God, but only partly predestined and partly open to alteration due to chance and human autonomous choice. Hebrews 11 teaches us of many historical events that were altered by the human choices of people "by faith" and not by predestined faithfulness.

4) I believe once God transfers a person into Christ, where they are born anew and sealed in Christ forever, they are saved forever and cannot lose their salvation or inheritance of eternal life. John 3:16.
You are neither a classical Arminian nor a Calvinist though
 

Charlie24

Well-Known Member
We calvinists woudl agree with you view on this form of Calvinism that you are reacting against, as we do not hold to that form either

This thread is, as I consider it a safe zone.

I will kindly disagree.

I will say to all the Calvinists/Sovereign Grace, I'm not the enemy I just strongly disagree with your Doctrine.

You are just as much saved as any of us by grace through faith in Christ.
 

atpollard

Well-Known Member

What is a Calvinist?​

Have you ever found yourself wondering about the principles that shape certain Christian beliefs? One foundational aspect of many Protestant denominations is Calvinism. But what exactly is a Calvinist? To understand this, we first need to explore the life of John Calvin, the theologian who significantly influenced the theological framework that bears his name.

The Origins of Calvinism​

Calvinism is named after John Calvin (1509-1564), a French theologian and reformer. Calvin’s teachings emerged during the Protestant Reformation, a period characterized by efforts to reform the practices and beliefs of the Catholic Church. His work had a profound impact, particularly in Switzerland and later in Reformed traditions around the world.

I disagree with the premise. First, what of HUS? Do the Hussites have nothing to do with reformed theology? There were “reformers” when Calvin was still wearing little boy pants. I seem to recall the actual “5 Doctrines of Grace” originating with the Synod of Dort. Where was John Calvin during the Synod of Dort?

I read that it was the Lutheran State Church that gifted the reformers with the name “Calvinist” in the exact same spirit of mockery that followers of The Way were tagged with the name “Christians” (little Christs) by their powerful enemies. So I find the introduction in the link to be factually in error on the link between the Doctrines of Grace (of which John only embraced 4 fully) and “The Institutes” by John Calvin.

As an aside, as a Particular Baptist, I owe more to Gutenberg (who gave us mass-produced Bibles) and men like Wycliffe (who gave us the scripture in a language that I could read for myself).
 

Dave G

Well-Known Member
I am what many here would call a "Calvinist", as what I believe on each of the so-called "Five Points" matches them... at least in spirit, if not in letter.

My only misgiving in the OP is in the conclusion below:
Understanding what is a Calvinist opens up a wealth of theological insight and community dynamics. Relying on the doctrines established by John Calvin, Calvinists celebrate the sovereignty of God, the necessity of grace, and the assurance of salvation. Through practical application and community engagement, the teachings of Calvinism can enrich personal faith and foster a deeper connection to the broader Christian community.
There are actually those among professing Christians ( like myself ) who see the things that are termed "Calvinism" all by themselves in their own studies of His word... and have never relied upon the doctrines established by John Calvin and his successors to guide them or even to influence them in any way whatsoever.

Most, if not all, of us come from backgrounds that are "non-Calvinist" / "Arminian"/ "etc." in their origins;
With me personally hearing God's word and believing on Christ for the forgiveness of my sins in an independent Baptist Church that taught what many are now calling, "Provisionism".

While the teachings of "Calvinism" may, in most cases, mirror my own beliefs... they do not do so in their entirety.
But on the so-called "Five Points", they do indeed.


Regarding salvation, faith and the natural condition of man:

I do not agree with the teachings of Jakob Hermanszoon ( "Jacobus Arminius" ), whose followers presented their Five Articles of the Remonstrants to the churches of the Netherlands in response to the Belgic Confession;
I also do not agree with the teachings of John Wesley, who went on to found what would later be known as "Wesleyanism" and the Methodist Church, and those teachings are generally known today as modern "Arminianism";

Finally, I do not agree with the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church, whose views on salvation, etc. were codified by Luis de Molina and is generally known as "Molinism".
 
Last edited:

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
So what do you hold to, as Calvinism makes perfect sense to those of us jere who hold to us now being found in Adam spiritually dead, and whose only hope would be via the Atonement provided for us thru and by ther Cross of Christ

Pretty much Scripture as it comes (as a narrative). The overall theme being "Christus Victor", which would exclude Calvinism and Arminianism by definition.

To give you an example - I believe that being saved from the wrath to come means that when that wrath comes we will be saved from it. This is based on 1 Peter 1 as well, so it is different from Preservation of the Saints in the readon we are saved (Preservation of the Saints is established on the other "points" of Calvinism).
 
Top