Who is a Calvinist?

[JesusFan]

The one doesn't preclude the other. The point is this: the unfaithful amongst the Jews cannot say they weren't "called".

"Theirs is the adoption to sonship; theirs the divine glory, the covenants, the receiving of the law, the temple worship and the promises." Rom 9:4.

They threw it all away. God didn't grant them "adoption," only for it to be taken away without a reason. That would make God out to be evil.

And consider: the High Calvinist / Augustinian view would make it seem that the children of God are other than adopted in this life, but that they are gods in their own right. Actually, the sons of God remain fallible human beings who like Paul, must "....strike a blow to my body and make it my slave so that after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified for the prize." 1 Cor 9:27.

Matt 23:12 "For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but the one who humbles himself will be exalted."

Jewish people no longer have a peculiar Covenant relationship with Yahweh had under the OT Old Covenant though now

 

[JesusFan]

I agree to a point. The New Covenant is for both Israel and the Gentile and we are one body in Christ.

The Gentile Church has been grafted into Israel's covenant, the New Covenant was made with them (Israel).

The covenant is not with the Church, it is with Israel, the natural seed of Abraham.

The New Covenant is made with the spiritual seeds of Abraham, the saved jews and Gentiles in one body now, the Church

 

[JesusFan]

It helps answer my question. I think we may view some of this differently, but to be fair I have not really dove into this topic.

I see nothing I'd disagree with in your explanation.

Here are some of my random thoughts (follies of a middle aged man....if 57 is "middle aged"):

Paul said that the promise was to Abraham and his Seed (singular, Christ).
The Old Covenant was given to Israel through Moses.
The New Covenant extends past Israel as a nation.

The New made with the Church, who is now Spiritual Israel

 

[cjab]

Jewish people no longer have a peculiar Covenant relationship with Yahweh had under the OT Old Covenant though now

The New Testament was indeed a covenant with the Jewish church, the vine remains Jewish, with the Gentiles only grafted in Romans 11:11-24.

 

[JesusFan]

The New Testament was indeed a covenant with the Jewish church, the vine remains Jewish, with the Gentiles only grafted in Romans 11:11-24.

Church not Jewish, its Both flocks of saved jews and gentiles

 

[Dave...]

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 used to consider myself to be a Calvinist/reformed. I preferer the term reformed, not Calvinist, for obvious reasons. I do still kind of consider myself reformed, though not by todays stringent standards. I was never 100% on board with everything in the reformed view, mostly because of the system it is placed into as a whole. That being TULIP. But for the most part, I had nothing against a sovereign God being Sovereign and still don't. For the record, nor do I believe that humanism should be used as a foundation for arguing against the reformed view.

I think the idea that someone arguing against the reformed view, and not being driven by humanism is completely foreign to most Calvinists today. In this instant gratification world, systems have replaced deep study and thought in Scripture. Systems can be a superficial context, in my opinion.

I decided to test my own beliefs, and pry open what I considered to be the weak spots in reformed theology myself. Who better, right?

One of the fatal flaws, as I see it, is everything in the "TULIP" system is built upon, or constructed around total depravity. The problem, again, in my opinion, is that the proof verses for total depravity, when the context for each is considered, is much less 'total' that most would be willing to admit. And are also mostly judicial, which is usually pushed aside as irrelevant. No matter what the topic of discussion, clear Scripture is completely disregarded for it. It's kind of a go to for the reformed view when they run short of the matter.

I'm still not sure for election, but am leaning away from "U" in the Tulip view. Limited atonement is really a non issue with me. It's really not important to me. Irresistible grace and perseverance of the saints can apply just as easily, in fact better when someone is in Christ, as opposed to before. Which brings me to what I consider to be the crux of the whole matter. To fix this, Calvinism extends that same grace to before a person believes, and in my mind, Scripture doesn't support this.

In a nut shell, It's all of God after we are indwelt, that's the life, the gift, the assurances, the faith, but not before. That's the difference between me and Calvinism today. A minor thing, probably, by the older theologians standards, but today, the system requires this foundation or it all falls down.

Dave

 

[cjab]

Church not Jewish, its Both flocks of saved jews and gentiles

The church is Jewish. You become an honorary Jew when you become a Christian.

"One Lord, one faith, one baptism," Eph 4:5. The church is the body of the Lord, a Jew, Col 1:18, headed by a Jew and obeying the doctrine of Jews.

Calvin wasn't appointed an apostle by Jesus. Don't know how anyone can even call themselves a "Calvinist."

 

[Charlie24]

The New made with the Church, who is now Spiritual Israel

That's very much incorrect, JF. There has never been a covenant made with the Gentile Church. Paul is here speaking to the Gentiles.

Rom. 11:24

"For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert grafted contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree?"

The covenant is made with natural seed of Abraham, and we Gentiles are grafted into their covenant.

 

[kyredneck]

We Gentile believers have been grafted into that promise God made with Abraham.

We are not the natural seed of Abraham, we are the spiritual seed of Abraham by faith in Jesus Christ.

The same promises made to Israel are given to us and we will share the land with them.

But the land promise is organized and divided in the name of the 12 tribes of Israel, found in the book of Ezekiel.

What a fool you are, Judaized, like as the very first heresy imposed upon Christianity.

Dispensationalism is the worst thing that ever happened to the Baptist church.

 

[Charlie24]

What a fool you are, Judaized, like as the very first heresy imposed upon Christianity.

Dispensationalism is the worst thing that ever happened to the Baptist church.

The separation of Israel and the Gentile Church is clearly taught in dispensationalism.

But only because the apostle Paul clearly taught it.

 

[David Lamb]

The separation of Israel and the Gentile Church is clearly taught in dispensationalism.

But only because the apostle Paul clearly taught it.

But Paul wrote:

“For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord over all is rich to all who call upon Him.” (Ro 10:12 NKJV)

“9 Do not lie to one another, since you have put off the old man with his deeds, 10 and have put on the new [man] who is renewed in knowledge according to the image of Him who created him, 11 where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcised nor uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave nor free, but Christ is all and in all.” (Col 3:9-11 NKJV)

 

[Charlie24]

But Paul wrote:

“For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord over all is rich to all who call upon Him.” (Ro 10:12 NKJV)

“9 Do not lie to one another, since you have put off the old man with his deeds, 10 and have put on the new [man] who is renewed in knowledge according to the image of Him who created him, 11 where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcised nor uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave nor free, but Christ is all and in all.” (Col 3:9-11 NKJV)

Very much true, David. There is no difference in salvation for the Jew and the Gentile.

You're reading in the rest, Paul is speaking of salvation here.

The distinction is the promises God made to Abraham's natural seed, Israel.

Covenant Theology spiritualizes the natural seed (Israel) to be the Gentile Church, big mistake!

Covenant theology says the Gentile Church has permanently replaced Israel, big mistake!

 

[Charlie24]

Very much true, David. There is no difference in salvation for the Jew and the Gentile.

You're reading in the rest, Paul is speaking of salvation here.

The distinction is the promises God made to Abraham's natural seed, Israel.

Covenant Theology spiritualizes the natural seed (Israel) to be the Gentile Church, big mistake!

Covenant theology says the Gentile Church has permanently replaced Israel, big mistake!

@David Lamb

These mistakes and many more I can bring up in Covenant Theology is the reason Dispensationalism exists.