A Tale of Two Calvinisms

[kyredneck]

I suppose that depends on perspective.
Until he comes again and sets up His reign at Jerusalem, I don't see where the Kingdom has come

Of course you don't see it, it can't be seen with the eye:

20 And being asked by the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God cometh, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation:
21 neither shall they say, Lo, here! or, There! for lo, the kingdom of God is within you. Lu 17 [Romans 14:17; 2 Peter 1:10-11]

Neither can it be touched with the hand:

18 For ye are not come unto a mount that might be touched, and that burned with fire, and unto blackness, and darkness, and tempest,
19 and the sound of a trumpet, and the voice of words; which voice they that heard entreated that no word more should be spoken unto them;
20 for they could not endure that which was enjoined, If even a beast touch the mountain, it shall be stoned;
21 and so fearful was the appearance, that Moses said, I exceedingly fear and quake:
22 but ye are come unto mount Zion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to innumerable hosts of angels, Heb 12

 

[JonC]

I suppose that depends on perspective.
Until he comes again and sets up His reign at Jerusalem, I don't see where the Kingdom has come unless we consider that it has come in the person of Christ's Spirit within them.

Right now He's in Heaven at the right hand of the Father making intercession for us.

Romans 8:29-30.
Ephesians 1:4-5.
2 Thessalonians 2:13-14.

I'm sorry, but I don't consider the difference between 1 Corinthians 15:1-6 and the rest of the news about what the Lord has to say about how and why someone is saved to be all that great.
While I hold that the apostles didn't preach every important detail of this in their public presentations to the masses, it was only further developed in the epistles.

In other words, I see that the contents of Romans 8:28-30 are as much the Gospel as its "smaller version"...
Christ crucified for sinners, His death, burial and resurrection the third day for sinners.
But God's word only expands on that the more we read it.

Apologies, but I rarely listen to preachers that are in the public eye anymore, so I'm not aware of what particular ones teach.

...and do you see anywhere in God's word what, exactly the good news of the Kingdom was / is?
If so, then I'd be interested to know where you think that the good news is further developed in the Scriptures.

The Jews were seeking the Kingdom (this was Nicodemus's express concern). The Bible (I provided a verse in Matthew, but there are numerous other examples) has Jesus Christ stating the gospel of the Kingdom. The parables are about this Kingdom. So I do think it is very safe to say that the gospel (per Christ) is this Kingdom's arrival.

This does not discount information about salvation.

Yes, the passages telling what this Kingdomis (what the good news is about) can be found throughoutthe OT. Read Isaiah and about this KingdomGod is bringinging into the world.

 

[Yeshua1]

Not according to Jesus and Paul.

The Primary theme of the NT is the Cross and insurrection of Lord Jesus!

 

[Yeshua1]

I agree. The doctrines are identical. It is the people who are different.

I think of Jesus' words in Matthew 7. Many who know doctrine, who participate in the ministry, do not know Christ and are not known by Him.

Doctrine is important. But God, not doctrine, saves.

And this applies not only to Calvinism, of course. I use Calvinism simply because I have seen so many who are strong Calvinists but appear spiritually dead. At the same time we have so many examples of Calvinists who are examples of how we should live.

Who would be an example of a known Calvinist teacher/pastor who is not saved but can expound the Calvinism?

 

[Yeshua1]

Yes, I am sure about that. The issue is not that the cross is unimportant (it is vital). But the gospel itself (per Christ) is that the Kingdom has come. The question, then, is how do we enter that Kingdom.

My point is that there is a difference between information about the gospel and the gospel itself (and the results of the "good news"). This is something I had not considered until D.A. Carson made it in his gospel lectures.

"And Jesus went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all manner of sickness and all manner of disease among the people." - Matthew 4

So Jesus preached "the good news of the Kingdom". I do not think that we can let this take a back seat to the Cross - but rather "the Cross" (Paul uses it to speak of God's reconciliation as a whole) is the means by which we are able to enter into that Kingdom.

The Cross and resurrection are THE central themes of the NT, as defined by the Apostles themselves!

 

[Yeshua1]

Yes, I am sure about that. The issue is not that the cross is unimportant (it is vital). But the gospel itself (per Christ) is that the Kingdom has come. The question, then, is how do we enter that Kingdom.

My point is that there is a difference between information about the gospel and the gospel itself (and the results of the "good news"). This is something I had not considered until D.A. Carson made it in his gospel lectures.

"And Jesus went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all manner of sickness and all manner of disease among the people." - Matthew 4

So Jesus preached "the good news of the Kingdom". I do not think that we can let this take a back seat to the Cross - but rather "the Cross" (Paul uses it to speak of God's reconciliation as a whole) is the means by which we are able to enter into that Kingdom.

The message of the Kingdom is important, but that is the major emphasis of NT Wright and others, not the NT Apostles themselves!

 

[Yeshua1]

I suppose we could say that anyone who disagrees with us are "oozing with self-pride and daring people to prove their nebulous theory to be wrong". That's just ad hominem and has no place in adult discussions. I will say that what may have led you to this erroneous conclusion is that you have made a false assumption - I do not believe that my personal thoughts about God are superior or more well thought than others on this forum. You are reading into my posts.

I do, however, believe that my own beliefs are correct - otherwise (to paraphrase John MacArthur) I'd change my incorrect beliefs so they'd be correct. I hope that you believe your beliefs are correct. You would be in a sad state if you thought your beliefs were false ones. But here you are confusing conclusions with observations. I have observed ungodly "Christians" who hold a good theology. The issue is not the theology but the person.

You are wrong that my intent is to disparage Calvin or Calvinists. I also affirm TULIP (which is what most here consider to be "Calvinism"). And I said very clearly (twice) that the issue is not Calvinism (the doctrine) but how some people hold the theology.

I am, BTW, agreeing with Jesus Christ. Many will say "Lord Lord" only to find that they were wrong - NOT in doctrine but in not being known by Him.

My personal thoughts about Calvinists is that Calvinists were the most used group to reach others for Christ in the 19th and perhaps 20th centuries. People accuse Calvinists of not having a motive for evangelism because of their doctrine - BUT history proves this accusation incorrect. The difference is not doctrine but Christ.

I understand Well's quote very well. And like I said, Wells was referring to Postmodernity and evangelical Christianity. Wells was not speaking of Reformed churches alone. I said that his quote made me think of the issue - NOT that his quote was about the topic.

Again, who are those who hold to Calvinism and are still lost in their sins?

 

[Yeshua1]

The Jews were seeking the Kingdom (this was Nicodemus's express concern). The Bible (I provided a verse in Matthew, but there are numerous other examples) has Jesus Christ stating the gospel of the Kingdom. The parables are about this Kingdom. So I do think it is very safe to say that the gospel (per Christ) is this Kingdom's arrival.

This does not discount information about salvation.

Yes, the passages telling what this Kingdomis (what the good news is about) can be found throughoutthe OT. Read Isaiah and about this KingdomGod is bringinging into the world.

The Kingdom is here, but not yet in full until the Second Coming...

 

[kyredneck]

The Primary theme of the NT is the Cross and insurrection of Lord Jesus!

Who would be an example of a known Calvinist teacher/pastor who is not saved but can expound the Calvinism?

The Cross and resurrection are THE central themes of the NT, as defined by the Apostles themselves!

The message of the Kingdom is important, but that is the major emphasis of NT Wright and others, not the NT Apostles themselves!

The Kingdom is here, but not yet in full until the Second Coming...

Like a starling flying over, 5 quips in a row with no scripture.

 

[JonC]

The message of the Kingdom is important, but that is the major emphasis of NT Wright and others, not the NT Apostles themselves!

The message of the Kingdom is the message of Christ. I am glad NT Wright recognized this, but I'm sure he is not alone. This is the point of Isaiah (the Kingdom God will bring forth) and the message Jesus spoke.

The Cross is vital. But the Cross divorced from the Kingdom is worthless. The Cross was God reconciling the World to Himself. This re-birth is how we enter the Kingdom.

Read John 2-3.

Again, who are those who hold to Calvinism and are still lost in their sins?

They are some of those Jesus spoke of in Matthew 7. I have met Calvinists who do not love their brother, who only insult and malign those Christians who disagree with them. One can hold correct doctrine yet be unsaved. Salvation is eternally more than the cognitive acceptance of doctrine. It is a re-birth, it is God drawing a man to Himself in Christ and making that person a new creation.

The Kingdom is here, but not yet in full until the Second Coming...

Yep.

The Primary theme of the NT is the Cross and insurrection of Lord Jesus!

No. The primary them is the reconciliation of man to God.

 

[Yeshua1]

The message of the Kingdom is the message of Christ. I am glad NT Wright recognized this, but I'm sure he is not alone. This is the point of Isaiah (the Kingdom God will bring forth) and the message Jesus spoke.

The Cross is vital. But the Cross divorced from the Kingdom is worthless. The Cross was God reconciling the World to Himself. This re-birth is how we enter the Kingdom.

Read John 2-3.


They are some of those Jesus spoke of in Matthew 7. I have met Calvinists who do not love their brother, who only insult and malign those Christians who disagree with them. One can hold correct doctrine yet be unsaved. Salvation is eternally more than the cognitive acceptance of doctrine. It is a re-birth, it is God drawing a man to Himself in Christ and making that person a new creation.
Yep.

No. The primary them is the reconciliation of man to God.

Take out the Cross and Resurrection, and all of the rest of the NT can go into the trash!

 

[kyredneck]

Take out the Cross and Resurrection, and all of the rest of the NT can go into the trash!

This is sooooo dishonest on your part, in no way is @JonC trying to "take out the Cross and Resurrection"....

 

[JonC]

Take out the Cross and Resurrection, and all of the rest of the NT can go into the trash!

I'm not talking about taking out anything. I am talking about the fact that Jesus' gospel is the gospel of the Kingdom (that is what the Bible says He taught).

What did Nicodemus ask? What was Jesus' response? Jesus equated being "saved" with "entering" or "seeing" the Kingdom of God. This is in the Gospel of John. In the Gospel of Matthew we also read that Jesus proclaimed the gospel of the Kingdom.

In Mark we read Jesus proclaiming “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe in the gospel.” That is the gospel. The time is fulfilled and the kingdom of God is at hand.

Jesus' words did not negate the cross (the cross had not even occurred when He proclaimed the gospel). But you do not have to deny the gospel in order to affirm the cross. Both are true and both are vital. But the gospel itself is not the cross (per Scripture). Men are not forgiven just for the sake of forgiveness. Men are not saved for the sake of being saved. Men are saved for a purpose (1 Peter 1) and this purpose is to do the works which have been preordained for them to do (kingdom work).

 

[MB]

I have noticed across boards and books that there are two kinds of Calvinism reflective of the two kinds of people that adhere to them. The doctrine is identical, but the people are completely different. We could say that there are simply two kinds of Calvinists, but based on arguments I think it is better put that the way Calvinism is held creates two different kinds of Calvinism as the arguments against Calvinism are often misdirected.

One is the idea that Calvinism best explains God’s work of Redemption from the standpoint of God’s sovereignty and the moral state of human beings. The other is that Calvinism is itself the gospel of Jesus Christ.

One is a theology, the other a philosophy that seeks to know God apart from Christ (a “backdoor Christianity).

While I believe the first is wrong, it is not a departure from the gospel but an explanation of the gospel. While I also believe the second is wrong, it is wrong on a more significant level as it is another gospel and is in opposition to the gospel of Jesus Christ.

The first recognizes that other Christians are no less brothers in Christ, no less mature in the Spirit, no less a partaker of the heavenly gifts and the enlightenment of the Holy Spirit. The second considers those who believe differently to be brethren, but less spiritual, less enlightened, less mature.

The first discerns that these theological positions are to those who hold them the gospel, for it is their understanding of the gospel, and they interact with fellow believers in respect and love. The second replaces the gospel with their understanding of the gospel and argues that others adopt their view.

The first is secondary to Christ in the lives of the believer. The second replaces Christ in the lives of a believer.

The first sheds understanding on a living faith. The second is a dead religion.

The first is an explanation, the second is a false gospel
.

Mat_12:25 And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand:

 

[JonC]

Mat_12:25 And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand:

I don't see Calvinism as being divided among itself, just that some so not seem to be Christians at all (by their behavior) while others have been used in great ways by God.

 

[Dave G]

just that some so not seem to be Christians at all (by their behavior)

I agree.
To me, there's been a fair amount of poor behavior within just the past few weeks on this forum, on both sides.

I recently told a friend that I was messaging that things can actually stop before they hit the keyboard...
It's up to each of us to edit before hitting "enter".

 

[MB]

I don't see Calvinism as being divided among itself, just that some so not seem to be Christians at all (by their behavior) while others have been used in great ways by God.

Ask David Taylor if He thinks Calvinist are believing the same as he does. There are so many different types of Calvinist I never know if I'm even speaking to one or not. There is 1,2,3,4, and 5 different types because of the tulip so many only believe one to Three doctrines of grace. None of them preach the gospel of Christ. They all claim election with out scriptural support. It's all Philosophical. Philosophy is not the gospel.Nor has it ever been truth
MB

 

[JonC]

I agree.
To me, there's been a fair amount of poor behavior within just the past few weeks on this forum, on both sides.

I recently told a friend that I was messaging that things can actually stop before they hit the keyboard...
It's up to each of us to edit before hitting "enter".

Yep. We cannot know what is in another person's heart. Sometimes Christians are ungodly, or act in a manner associated with the flesh. We can determine their spiritual state (they are disobedient and walking in the flesh) but not the state of their salvation (God may be working in them, disciplining them...something that God does not do with the lost). I'm sure we have all acted contrary to the Spirit at times, but hopefully it is not the mark of our lives.

This board has been a blessing in that we have the opportunity to discuss matters of faith with people who agree and disagree with us. Sometimes it can also be a stumbling block. Very often the true character of a person - all doctrine aside - is revealed by that person's interactions (especially in online forums where so many think it doesn't matter).

 

[kyredneck]

...There are so many different types of Calvinist I never know if I'm even speaking to one or not. There is 1,2,3,4, and 5 different types

...doesn't even come close to the confusion that exists within Dispensationalism.

 

[MB]

...doesn't even come close to the confusion that exists within Dispensationalism.

You just can't understand it.
MB