Arminius on Calvin

[Alive in Christ]

Quantum posted...

My issues (problems) etc. are far less with Calvin than with the derogatory, demeaning and disrespect that you dole out here in BB.

Truth.

 

[Rippon]

... the system seem to me to take truth too far

Better to take truth as far as possible instead of coming up short on the truth stick.

 

[Luke2427]

Quantum posted...




Truth.

I find this post to be derogatory, demeaning and disrespectful. :wavey:

 

[Skandelon]

Wouldn't it be wonderful if all of those who wear the Arminian stripe, both those who do it proudly and those who are really Arminian but reject the label, had the insight that this wise father of their dogma had?

I agree. It would have been very disrespectful of Arminus to call Calvin's view a "weirdo nameless theology...that swings open wide the door to damnable heresy." I can't imagine who would show that kind of disrepect for other brethren of the faith. Can you? :tear:

 

[Luke2427]

I agree. It would have been very disrespectful of Arminus to call Calvin's view a "weirdo nameless theology...that swings open wide the door to damnable heresy." I can't imagine who would show that kind of disrepect for other brethren of the faith. Can you? :tear:

Primarily because it would have been utterly ridiculous.

Arminianism is not the big problem, imo.

I was a devout Arminian for 10 years.

I attended a thoroughly Arminian Bible College.

I have been debating Calvinists since I was 18.

And I can say that Arminianism is orthodox.

My problem is this new weirdo nameless theology that opens wide the door to heresy- this eclectic hodge podge of doctrines that do not fit together and that stem from what is OFTEN a total lack of understanding, reverence and even interest in the Historic Christian Faith.

The attitude and philosophy that gave rise to this new nameless stuff is, imo, the same that gave rise to Finney's theology, Pentecostalism, Mormonism, etc...

 

[quantumfaith]

QF,you would have to agree with Luke on this one,or else you would be acting immaturely.

Not exactly certain what I must agree with here. I do immensely respect most anyone who dedicates a lifetime of intellectual (and otherwise) capital in pursuit of a passion, gift and calling. So yes, on those grounds I respect Mr. Calvin, but at the same time, that does not mean I find myself in agreement on most things, much like imminent scientists and philosophers, who I also respect, but reach different conclusions.

As I attempted to communicate and will continue to do so, it is not so much the position that Luke (you and others) have, but the manner in which that position is articulated and supported.

 

[Jerome]

"I admit that some called, Calvinists, are the most quarrelsome set breathing, this is the reason—while they have the main part of the Truth of God, many of them are leaving out something important—therefore God chastises them because they are some of His best children! It may be a sign of life that they are so eager after Truth that they kill one another in order to get it, but I wish they would leave off their quarrelling, for it is a disgrace to our religion." —Charles Spurgeon, "The God of Peace"

"How zealous they are for Protestantism! They would not only die for orthodoxy, but kill others as well. Perhaps it is the Calvinistic doctrine which they have received, and then the five points are as dear to them as their five senses. These men will contend, not to say earnestly, but savagely for the faith. They very vehemently denounce all those who differ from them in the smallest degree; and deal damnation round the land with amazing liberality to all who are not full weight according to the balance of their little Zoar, Rehoboth, or Jireh" —Charles Spurgeon, "Nothing But Leaves"

 

[Alive in Christ]

Jerome posted...

"I admit that some called, Calvinists, are the most quarrelsome set breathing, this is the reason—while they have the main part of the Truth of God, many of them are leaving out something important—therefore God chastises them because they are some of His best children! It may be a sign of life that they are so eager after Truth that they kill one another in order to get it, but I wish they would leave off their quarrelling, for it is a disgrace to our religion." —Charles Spurgeon, "The God of Peace"

"How zealous they are for Protestantism! They would not only die for orthodoxy, but kill others as well. Perhaps it is the Calvinistic doctrine which they have received, and then the five points are as dear to them as their five senses. These men will contend, not to say earnestly, but savagely for the faith. They very vehemently denounce all those who differ from them in the smallest degree; and deal damnation round the land with amazing liberality to all who are not full weight according to the balance of their little Zoar, Rehoboth, or Jireh" —Charles Spurgeon, "Nothing But Leaves"

Wow. Never read that before. That quite interesting

 

[webdog]

"I admit that some called, Calvinists, are the most quarrelsome set breathing, this is the reason—while they have the main part of the Truth of God, many of them are leaving out something important—therefore God chastises them because they are some of His best children! It may be a sign of life that they are so eager after Truth that they kill one another in order to get it, but I wish they would leave off their quarrelling, for it is a disgrace to our religion." —Charles Spurgeon, "The God of Peace"

"How zealous they are for Protestantism! They would not only die for orthodoxy, but kill others as well. Perhaps it is the Calvinistic doctrine which they have received, and then the five points are as dear to them as their five senses. These men will contend, not to say earnestly, but savagely for the faith. They very vehemently denounce all those who differ from them in the smallest degree; and deal damnation round the land with amazing liberality to all who are not full weight according to the balance of their little Zoar, Rehoboth, or Jireh" —Charles Spurgeon, "Nothing But Leaves"

Boy was he off... :laugh:

 

[Alive in Christ]

Luke...

You posted....

My problem is this new weirdo nameless theology that opens wide the door to heresy- this eclectic hodge podge of doctrines that do not fit together and that stem from what is OFTEN a total lack of understanding, reverence and even interest in the Historic Christian Faith.

I agree with you regarding "weirdo" theologies that crop up from time to time.

The attitude and philosophy that gave rise to this new nameless stuff...

What specifically are you referring to? The "name it/claim it bunch? They are definetly problematic.

is, imo, the same that gave rise to Finney's theology, Pentecostalism, Mormonism, etc...

Mormonism is cultic to the core. But you cant lump all of pentecostalism in with all of those others. Some pentacostal groups are indeed cultic, while some others are not in any way cultic.

We shouldnt engage in "carpet bombing", so to speak.

 

[Rippon]

"I admit that some called, Calvinists, are the most quarrelsome set breathing, this is the reason—while they have the main part of the Truth of God, many of them are leaving out something important—therefore God chastises them because they are some of His best children! It may be a sign of life that they are so eager after Truth that they kill one another in order to get it, but I wish they would leave off their quarrelling, for it is a disgrace to our religion." —Charles Spurgeon, "The God of Peace"

"How zealous they are for Protestantism! They would not only die for orthodoxy, but kill others as well. Perhaps it is the Calvinistic doctrine which they have received, and then the five points are as dear to them as their five senses. These men will contend, not to say earnestly, but savagely for the faith. They very vehemently denounce all those who differ from them in the smallest degree; and deal damnation round the land with amazing liberality to all who are not full weight according to the balance of their little Zoar, Rehoboth, or Jireh" —Charles Spurgeon, "Nothing But Leaves"

I would think that C.H.S. was especially targeting hyper-Calvinists in the above quotes.

 

[JesusFan]

I would think that C.H.S. was especially targeting hyper-Calvinists in the above quotes.

Don't you find many Arminians group all of us cals together in the "Hyper Cal" camp though?

Not knowing there varying degrees of Cals in Christianity?

 

[Jerome]

Varying degrees?

Really?

[Four-point calvinists] are not Calvinists -- plain and simple.

I don't know of any professing Calvinist for instance who denies any of the Calvinistic Canons of Dort.

Amyraldian -- not a true Calvinist

Being a "Moderate Calvinist" is bunk.

 

[JesusFan]

Varying degrees?

Really?

Well

IF you go into the "reformed" Calvinists pretty much ALL see it strictly as the Creed/Councils TULIP all points etc

have a hunch IF you go into Baptist Churches you would tend to see mor eprominent "4 pointers" we who are the "fake" Calvinists!

Don't worry... IF you believe that grace IS iressible, and that God HAS TO elect out his own people directly, still would have to be a cal, as no Arminian would agree with that!

 

[Rippon]

Varying degrees?

Really?

In my post #31 I said nothing of varying degrees. I said that Spurgeon was probably targeting hyper-Calvinists in the two quotes you provided.

 

[Jerome]

I know you didn't. JesusFan did.

Interesting. . .are you of the opinion that HyperCalvinists were/are particularly quarrelsome, savage, etc.?

 

[Luke2427]

Jerome posted...




Wow. Never read that before. That quite interesting

You must not follow Jerome at all. He posts that about twice a week I believe.

Spurgeon equated Calvinism with THE GOSPEL- yet Jerome supposes that this quote means that Spurgeon would have been against Calvinists contending for it.

That is the impression, I suppose, Jerome would like to give. Anybody who knows Spurgeon knows better.

Here is a quote by Spurgeon that best represents his feelings about Calvinism and his feelings about those who would preach anything ELSE BUT Calvinism:

If anyone should ask me what I mean by a Calvinist, I should reply, “He is one who says, Salvation is of the Lord.” I cannot find in Scripture any other doctrine than this. It is the essence of the Bible. “He only is my rock and my salvation.”

Tell me anything contrary to this truth, and it will be a heresy; tell me a heresy, and I shall find its essence here, that it has departed from this great, this fundamental, this rock-truth, “God is my rock and my salvation.” What is the heresy of Rome, but the addition of something to the perfect merits of Jesus Christ—the bringing in of the works of the flesh, to assist in our justification? And what is the heresy of Arminianism but the addition of something to the work of the Redeemer? Every heresy, if brought to the touchstone, will discover itself here.

I have my own private opinion that there is no such thing as preaching Christ and Him crucified, unless we preach what nowadays is called Calvinism. It is a nickname to call it Calvinism; Calvinism is the gospel, and nothing else.

So don't pay Jerome any attention with his out-of-context Spurgeon quotes.

 

[Luke2427]

Luke...

You posted....



I agree with you regarding "weirdo" theologies that crop up from time to time.



What specifically are you referring to? The "name it/claim it bunch? They are definetly problematic.




Mormonism is cultic to the core. But you cant lump all of pentecostalism in with all of those others. Some pentacostal groups are indeed cultic, while some others are not in any way cultic.

We shouldnt engage in "carpet bombing", so to speak.

What is the official name of your theology? I think that it is whatever THAT is that I am talking about.

Is it not nameless?

You do not call it Calvinism, right? (Norman Geisler does, but you do not)

You do not call it Arminianism, right? (Though you are really 4/5's Arminian, are you not?)

You do not call it Amyraldianism, right?

You do not call it Molinism, right?


This is the part where most of the guys who think like you say something like- "I Call it THE BIBLE!" or "I am a BIBLICIST!" or "I don't follow a man!!! I follow Jesus (just like the Corinthians who Paul rebuked along side those who he rebuked for saying they were of Paul and those who said they were of Apollos.)

If you are not going to respond with something akin to the above- what DO you call your theology?

When was it systematized?

What are it's historical roots?

 

[Van]

Lets name it and claim it: Reformed or Calvinistic Theology
Arminian Theology, or Catholic Theology, or Mormon Theology.
So being able to label a theology does not support its validity.

How about Minimalist Bible Theology. It is based on the idea of avoiding corrupting God's word with man-made additions, or nullifying verses that do not mesh with an idealized theology based on selected interpretations of selected verses.

 

[BobinKy]

My problem is this new weirdo nameless theology that opens wide the door to heresy- this eclectic hodge podge of doctrines that do not fit together and that stem from what is OFTEN a total lack of understanding, reverence and even interest in the Historic Christian Faith.

The above statement, refined and edited somewhat, would make a very good thread. Say something like this--

Why do the doctrines of many churches started in the last 100 years have a lack of understanding, reverence and interest in the Historic Christian Faith?​

...Bob