Calvinists can't stand when smart people don't agree with them.

[jbh28]

Calvinists can't stand when smart people don't agree with them

That would be about like saying we hate it when a circle is a square.


Just kidding of course. I don't think that the title of this thread is accurate. It's not accurate for the Calvinist here on this board. I think we can have our disagreements, but I have high respect for many people that are smarter than me* that disagree with me.


* Yes, I know the proper grammar here should be "I" sense the subject case is being used, but that just sounds weird.

 

[Skandelon]

Here is more from Piper that better expresses the point regarding the 'insult':

. . .a Reformed position mainly means, God is really big, really strong, really powerful, really knowledgeable, really wise, really great, really weighty, and he is going to be big in this service, and we’re going to make a big deal out of God here. There are a lot of born-again Arminian people who like that. It’s because they don’t see the implications of their theology.

And if you get a congregation liking that over time—”God is great, and we’re going to celebrate his magnificence and his power and his sovereignty” (just leave it undefined for the time being. Everybody believes in the sovereignty of God, one way or the other)—what happens is that when your heart begins to get shaped around a massive, big, glorious view of God, then when you get to specifics in Romans 8 and 9 or Ephesians 2, about election and whatnot, your heart is more ready for it.

So the flourishing could be that you’re taking people where you know you want them to go, just because God is magnificent. And your Reformed orientation makes you keenly aware of that. Their Arminian orientation doesn’t naturally make them as aware of that. And you’re going to take them there. - John Piper

We are just not intellectual enough to be "aware" of the "implications" of our view....

 

[annsni]

Here is more from Piper that better expresses the point regarding the 'insult':



We are just not intellectual enough to be "aware" of the "implications" of our view....

Where is this all "intellectual"?

 

[webdog]

Here is more from Piper that better expresses the point regarding the 'insult':



We are just not intellectual enough to be "aware" of the "implications" of our view....

That sounds like something Luke24 would have written

 

[HeirofSalvation]

Show me where he murdered anyone.

He may have been referring to that little "Michael Servetus" incident...maybe not a "murder" per se but after jockeying for his arrest and trial for heresy and what-not.... he graciously pushed for a mere be-heading as opposed to burning at the stake. (he lost that particular appeal). Michael Servetus, only incidentally of course, was also very brilliant hence the hatred of him I imagine and we owe much of our modern medical knowledge of the pulmonary circulation of the blood to him....as he was the first European to explain it. He was slaughtered for two things: Denying the Trinity ..Servetus asserted that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit were dispositions of God, and not separate and distinct beings.[35] Wilbur promotes the idea that Servetus was a modalist.

and denouncing infant baptism, So don't get too close to John Calvin if you are a Baptist. You could assign whatever level of blame upon Calvin himself for it that you want I suppose. Whole debates rage over how complicit Calvin was or wasn't, and for the most part, they of course are divided along the lines of Calvinists and non-Calvinists.

On 27 October 1553 Servetus was burned at the stake just outside Geneva with what was believed to be the last copy of his book chained to his leg. Historians record his last words as: "Jesus, Son of the Eternal God, have mercy on me."

Some non-Cals have a tendency to take umbrage at statements that Calvin made such as:

Whoever shall maintain that wrong is done to heretics and blasphemers in punishing them makes himself an accomplice in their crime and guilty as they are. There is no question here of man's authority; it is God who speaks, and clear it is what law he will have kept in the church, even to the end of the world. Wherefore does he demand of us a so extreme severity, if not to show us that due honor is not paid him, so long as we set not his service above every human consideration, so that we spare not kin, nor blood of any, and forget all humanity when the matter is to combat for His glory.[31]

Imagine the power that the likes of Calvin had in the hands of some of your modern Cals. I will mention no names, [snipped: inflammatory] for rejecting Calvinism, or as it is so euphemistically termed:the "Doctrines of Grace", given the chance and the power to do so. I hope not.

Servetus was decidedly wrong about his view of the Trinity, (right about infant baptism) but his real crime was probably that he regularly published writings wherein he debated against Calvin, and that unfortunately.... he was smart.

 

[annsni]

He may have been referring to that little "Michael Servetus" incident...maybe not a "murder" per se but after jockeying for his arrest and trial for heresy and what-not.... he graciously pushed for a mere be-heading as opposed to burning at the stake. (he lost that particular appeal).

I don't believe that Calvin "jockeyed" for his arrest and instead counseled him to not come to Geneva and when Servetus did, and was arrested and convicted, Calvin asked that he have a more "humane" death of beheading as opposed to being burned at the stake but he was denied that idea. Calvin had nothing to do with Servetus' arrest, conviction and death. Yes, he was a witness at his trial but with a trial of 2 months long, I doubt Calvin's testimony was the only one and since Servetus WAS a heretic, what was Calvin to do? Lie? No - he spoke the truth as did others.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

I don't believe that Calvin "jockeyed" for his arrest and instead counseled him to not come to Geneva and when Servetus did, and was arrested and convicted, Calvin asked that he have a more "humane" death of beheading as opposed to being burned at the stake but he was denied that idea. Calvin had nothing to do with Servetus' arrest, conviction and death. Yes, he was a witness at his trial but with a trial of 2 months long, I doubt Calvin's testimony was the only one and since Servetus WAS a heretic, what was Calvin to do? Lie? No - he spoke the truth as did others.

Yes....the debate is indeed on-going, and each side sees it as they want to. Theological pre-disposition dominates the point of view, not objective knowledge of history. Does his being a modalist make him a "heretic" deserving of death or his disagreement with infant baptism? Was Calvin "counseling" him (out of genuine concern) not to come to Geneva? Is that what happened? Did Calvin have NOTHING to do with having him arrested convicted and sentenced in the first place? Well, believe what you will. I know that there is no conceivable way that anyone on any given side of the Theological divide could possibly cross over the Historical one. I am no authority on the topic myself, and I imagine that truth is somewhere in the middle of the two ideas. Somewhere in the middle of Calvin being a blood-thirsty Papist and his being a genuinely concerned "counselor" advising Servetus (out of sheer Christ-like love) to avoid Geneva and then being un-avoidably thrust into the middle of a situation he had NO desire to be in as you suggest is probably the reality of what happened. Calvin after all had zero influence in the politics of Geneva at the time

 

[quantumfaith]

Yes....the debate is indeed on-going, and each side sees it as they want to. Theological pre-disposition dominates the point of view, not objective knowledge of history. Does his being a modalist make him a "heretic" deserving of death or his disagreement with infant baptism? Was Calvin "counseling" him (out of genuine concern) not to come to Geneva? Is that what happened? Did Calvin have NOTHING to do with having him arrested convicted and sentenced in the first place? Well, believe what you will. I know that there is no conceivable way that anyone on any given side of the Theological divide could possibly cross over the Historical one. I am no authority on the topic myself, and I imagine that truth is somewhere in the middle of the two ideas. Somewhere in the middle of Calvin being a blood-thirsty Papist and his being a genuinely concerned "counselor" advising Servetus (out of sheer Christ-like love) to avoid Geneva and then being un-avoidably thrust into the middle of a situation he had NO desire to be in as you suggest is probably the reality of what happened. Calvin after all had zero influence in the politics of Geneva at the time

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

[OldRegular]

I don't believe that Calvin "jockeyed" for his arrest and instead counseled him to not come to Geneva and when Servetus did, and was arrested and convicted, Calvin asked that he have a more "humane" death of beheading as opposed to being burned at the stake but he was denied that idea. Calvin had nothing to do with Servetus' arrest, conviction and death. Yes, he was a witness at his trial but with a trial of 2 months long, I doubt Calvin's testimony was the only one and since Servetus WAS a heretic, what was Calvin to do? Lie? No - he spoke the truth as did others.

Actually Ann, Calvin and Servetus have nothing to do with the discussion on this Board and this thread in particular. Reference to them is just one more effort to slime those who believe the Biblical Doctrine of Grace! Guilt by association is a little ridiculous given the lapse of several hundred years but some will make any effort.

 

[OldRegular]

[snipped - inflammatory quote]

All you "freewillers" on this Board should take note of the sick remarks by one of your own!

I have been on this Board periodically since 2004. I have read some vitriolic remarks and have made some myself but I have never read anything as sick as that quoted!

 

[annsni]

All you "freewillers" on this Board should take note of the sick remarks by one of your own!

I have been on this Board periodically since 2004. I have read some vitriolic remarks and have made some myself but I have never read anything as sick as that quoted!

I agree with you on this. It really IS quite a nasty attack and one that I don't think will bother many of those who attack those of us who believe in the doctrines of grace.

 

[Skandelon]

Actually Ann, Calvin and Servetus have nothing to do with the discussion on this Board and this thread in particular. Reference to them is just one more effort to slime those who believe the Biblical Doctrine of Grace! Guilt by association is a little ridiculous given the lapse of several hundred years but some will make any effort.

I agree.......and I don't believe anyone here would literally physically harm another believer, and we really shouldn't judge others intentions simply based upon our soteriological differences. We have much more in common than most others in the world.

 

[OldRegular]

All you "freewillers" on this Board should take note of the sick remarks by one of your own!

I have been on this Board periodically since 2004. I have read some vitriolic remarks and have made some myself but I have never read anything as sick as that quoted!

The remarks I quoted have been removed by the Moderator. I suppose that is the best way to handle the situation!

 

[OldRegular]

What he denied were the Calvinistic doctrines of grace that make man a puppet and God a puppetmaster.

The above quote is an uncouth way to state it but: Read and learn!:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

Isaiah 64:8. But now, O LORD, thou art our father; we are the clay, and thou our potter; and we all are the work of thy hand.
Jeremiah 18:6. O house of Israel, cannot I do with you as this potter? saith the LORD. Behold, as the clay is in the potter’s hand, so are ye in mine hand, O house of Israel.
Romans 9:21. Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

 

[Iconoclast]

webdog

In all the years you and I have exchanged barbs on this Board I have never seen you refute any Scripture I posted. All I get, and for that matter most others get, is a snotty remark that addresses nothing. May I also say you have an apt pupil in "hos"!

Furthermore, do you ever present Scripture to defend your remarks?



You were the one talking about "stillborn Christians"! I just thought your "paci" might be worn out!

:applause::laugh::thumbsup:

 

[glazer1972]

If this thread has proven anything, it has proven this:

Neither Calvinists, nor non-calvinists, like it when anyone disagrees with them about anything, whether the person is considered to be smart or not!

So the title of the thread is technically true, but only because it also applies to EVERYONE ELSE as well!

I refer you to this blog article I found:

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=78787

Help me understand how the proposal of an honest question (which you did not address) necessarily implies an obvious level of spiritual immaturity. In fact, the very asking of the question seems to underscore the opposite.

11 We have much to say about this, but it is hard to make it clear to you because you no longer try to understand.

Seems to me the search for answers, some of which will never be known to us with certainty, despite the elegant and systematically structured rhetoric used by all of us at times, at the very least hints at the attempt to grow and develop spiritually and intellectually.

I was not suggesting that he was spiritually immature for asking the question. I was suggesting that spiritual immaturity was the answer to his question.

 

[quantumfaith]

I was not suggesting that he was spiritually immature for asking the question. I was suggesting that spiritual immaturity was the answer to his question.

:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:

 

[HeirofSalvation]

[snipped - inflammatory quote]

All you "freewillers" on this Board should take note of the sick remarks by one of your own!

I have been on this Board periodically since 2004. I have read some vitriolic remarks and have made some myself but I have never read anything as sick as that quoted!

With all due respect, this is hyperbolic. There was no guilt by association as you implied. If my remarks were inappropriate, fine. I concede this was not the place to convey them, but swooning as you are is weak. If those were the MOST VITRIOLIC comments you have heard in as long as you claim....may I suggest you get out more? You made some rough statements and accusations on this thread that were inappropriate yourself, including your blatantly false implication of ITL (to which you have not responded) attempting to shift umbrage isn't going to fly. If I owe some an apology (I do) you do as well.

I still suggest you answer this:

Thanks HOS. I'm really getting ripped here the past couple of days and I can't understand why.

OldRegular, which post is an attack?

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthre...74#post1850074
http://www.baptistboard.com/showthre...84#post1849684
http://www.baptistboard.com/showthre...65#post1849665
http://www.baptistboard.com/showthre...52#post1849652
http://www.baptistboard.com/showthre...33#post1849633


Please explain how ITL is guilty of "ad hominems" as you stated...if you cannot do so, you may need to concede a few inappropriate comments yourself. It was awfully convenient for you that I stepped out of line... it made you quite happy I think, but to take advantage of it in order to shift focus from some of your own comments is weak sir.

 

[McWilliams]

Regarding the OP I must say that I am ever so grateful for His grace that made me a five point flaming calvinist! Who knows but that same thing may happen to you at some point, when you come to see our sovereign God as high, holy and lifted up and yourself as a little mud ball without any hope at all until He regenerates your heart and you fall humbly on your face before Him as Isaiah did when he saw Him! What joy filled my heart when I came to see the biblical truth of the doctrines of grace and now I pray for others to have the same reason to rejoice! You will then have no cause to criticise others but will only thank Him for having shown Himself to you clearly! Soli deo gloria!!

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Regarding the OP I must say that I am ever so grateful for His grace that made me a five point flaming calvinist! Who knows but that same thing may happen to you at some point, when you come to see our sovereign God as high, holy and lifted up and yourself as a little mud ball without any hope at all until He regenerates your heart and you fall humbly on your face before Him as Isaiah did when he saw Him! What joy filled my heart when I came to see the biblical truth of the doctrines of grace and now I pray for others to have the same reason to rejoice! You will then have no cause to criticise others but will only thank Him for having shown Himself to you clearly! Soli deo gloria!!

Bravo :thumbs: