Calvin's Amillennialism and Infant Baptism

[Winman]

I have a theory on this that is becoming clearer as I view more threads on the BB.

All real believers are Calvinists.They do not fully realize it yet.:thumbsup:

That is why many times you see them say..."well I believe parts of Calvinism."

The part they believe is the part they have clarity on.
Many get sidetracked with other ideas, writings and theories...that actually work to confuse them.
They go for some of the glitter of the novelties offered, by carnal reasoning ,and carnal philosophy which always departs from biblical reasoning and philosophy.
Sometimes they like the writing style of a person and get taken in for a time...until life forces them re-examine these teachings.
I have several anecdotal stories of this, but anecdotal stories do not prove what only scripture can declare and prove.

Many professed Christians are tossed to and fro by every wind of doctrine, because they have turned from truth that they have seen, but resist.

Most who fight hard against these truths usually come to be strong advocates of these doctrines....having first tried to oppose them for a long time.:wavey:

This very short video sums up my answer to this post.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m30mG3JKzA8

 

[Iconoclast]

This very short video sums up my answer to this post.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m30mG3JKzA8

To help you in your quest:
http://www.oldtruth.com/calvinism/calvinism.html

http://www.oldtruth.com/calvinism/balanced.html

 

[Winman]

To help you in your quest:
http://www.oldtruth.com/calvinism/calvinism.html

http://www.oldtruth.com/calvinism/balanced.html

Oh brother, you don't know when to give up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JJ700tVT_0

That's what I think of Calvinism.

 

[Iconoclast]

Oh brother, you don't know when to give up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JJ700tVT_0

That's what I think of Calvinism.

Check this out Winman:
This is from the arminian baptist.....I found these points interesting-

Calvinist churches are but a small minority; most evangelical churches are Arminian or semi-Arminian. However, the Calvinist resurgence is producing full Five Point Calvinist pastors looking for work. The resurgence is also prompting Arminian and semi-Arminian pastors to embrace Calvinism. This dynamic is the source of considerable tension in the life of the local church, not to mention in the heart of such pastors as they hold to a view which is often at odds with their churches.

Since the majority of these churches are Arminian or semi-Arminian, and since the typical congregation is not theologically astute enough to detect various subtleties of the debate

Thus, Calvinism on the sly attempts to mute all phrases which teach a universal atonement. After a year or two, the Calvinistic pastor then starts teaching on the issues which are less obviously Calvinistic. For example, there will be a strong emphasis on Calvinistic particularities of Total Depravity, monergism, irresistibility of grace, and de-emphasis on faith as a condition of salvation. Still, the congregation remains typically ignorant on many of these issues as well. One or two might raise questions, but they will still be entirely unsuspecting of how this is all prelude to limited atonement.
Meanwhile, the Calvinistic pastor manages to network with other Calvinists in the area, and perhaps draws one or two into his congregation whom he promotes and with whom he forms a mutual support within the congregation. This creates a divide between those who are clued into the secret coded language of Calvinism and the main body of the congregation. The informed Calvinists, led by their pastor and aided by their knowledge of the coded language produce an in-crowd which puts them at odds with the rest of the congregation. Still, the congregation remains clueless, having no idea that the newly formed inner circle propagates the notion that Jesus only died for the few.

Why would the congregation ...remain clueless two years into the mans ministry???They must really know their bibles!

 

[Winman]

Check this out Winman:
This is from the arminian baptist.....I found these points interesting-

Why would the congregation ...remain clueless two years into the mans ministry???They must really know their bibles!

You are correct, must believers do not really know their Bible or they would reject Calvinism immediately.

I reject Calvinism, but I ALWAYS show scripture that refutes it. Truth is, I have only shown a few scriptures that refute Calvinism, I could literally show thousands, but that would be overkill. If you will not listen to 20 or 30 verses that clearly refute Calvinism, then you certainly aren't going to listen to hundreds or thousands.

You would not even understand how many of the scriptures I show you refutes Calvinism, because your mind is blinded by false doctrine. For instance, I will show you scripture that Calvinists quote every day to attempt to prove Calvinism, but in reality they clearly refute it.

Rom 3:12 They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.

Calvinsts quote this scripture all the time to attempt to prove Total Inability, but it refutes your doctrine.

Notice the words, "gone out". You can not go out of something unless you are originally in something. For instance, you can not go out of your house unless you are first IN your house. But, because your mind is blinded by false doctrine, you completely overlook these words.

Notice next the word "become". Here Paul is repeating Psalm 14 where it says we have "become filthy". This shows a process, that we were first clean and then became filthy or unprofitable.

If you were born rich, would you tell someone you "became" rich? No.

If you were born poor, but worked diligently and acquired wealth, would you tell anyone you "became" rich? YES.

So, the scripture you quote to prove your doctrine actually in truth refutes your doctrine, but your mind has been conditioned to overlook this.

Isa 64:6 But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.

Again, scripture quoted by Calvinists to attempt to prove Total Inability which actually refutes it.

No piece of clothing starts out as a filthy rag, all clothing is clean and without tears to begin with. You overlook this.

It is spring, have you noticed the new leaves on the trees? What color are they?

All leaves begin green and alive, there is no such thing as a new leaf being faded and dead.

This scripture proves we are born alive and upright. We start out like new clothing that is clean and not torn, we start out like a fresh new green leaf, but our sins soil and rip our clothing, and cause our leaf to wither, turn brown and die.

But you overlook all this because you have been blinded by false doctrine. You have been shown, so now you have no excuse.

 

[Iconoclast]

Winman
[

B]Isa 64:6[/B] But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.

Again, scripture quoted by Calvinists to attempt to prove Total Inability which actually refutes it.

No piece of clothing starts out as a filthy rag, all clothing is clean and without tears to begin with. You overlook this.

It is spring, have you noticed the new leaves on the trees? What color are they?

All leaves begin green and alive, there is no such thing as a new leaf being faded and dead.

This scripture proves we are born alive and upright. We start out like new clothing that is clean and not torn, we start out like a fresh new green leaf, but our sins soil and rip our clothing, and cause our leaf to wither, turn brown and die.

But you overlook all this because you have been blinded by false doctrine. You have been shown, so now you have no excuse.

[/QUOTE]
Winman,
you missed this verse as usual because you are tossed to and fro....

it is speaking about how men lack the righteousness of God...the "rag" is in reality ...the menstrual rag of a woman on her monthly cycle...literally:thumbs: it is not about how we start fresh:wavey:

Your agenda again betrays you as you never studied this verse:thumbs:

 

[Winman]

Winman,
you missed this verse as usual because you are tossed to and fro....

it is speaking about how men lack the righteousness of God...the "rag" is in reality ...the menstrual rag of a woman on her monthly cycle...literally:thumbs: it is not about how we start fresh:wavey:

Your agenda again betrays you as you never studied this verse:thumbs:

Well, as you drive your truck around, you look at all the fresh green leaves on the trees.

There is none so blind as those who refuse to see.

 

[Iconoclast]

Well, as you drive your truck around, you look at all the fresh green leaves on the trees.

There is none so blind as those who refuse to see.

This is speaking of going on to judgement;

nd we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.

Unless God has mercy, we perish;
New International Version (©2011)
All of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous acts are like filthy rags; we all shrivel up like a leaf, and like the wind our sins sweep us away.

New Living Translation (©2007)
We are all infected and impure with sin. When we display our righteous deeds, they are nothing but filthy rags. Like autumn leaves, we wither and fall, and our sins sweep us away like the wind.

English Standard Version (©2001)
We have all become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous deeds are like a polluted garment. We all fade like a leaf, and our iniquities, like the wind, take us away.

New American Standard Bible (©1995)
For all of us have become like one who is unclean, And all our righteous deeds are like a filthy garment; And all of us wither like a leaf, And our iniquities, like the wind, take us away.

King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.

Holman Christian Standard Bible (©2009)
All of us have become like something unclean, and all our righteous acts are like a polluted garment; all of us wither like a leaf, and our iniquities carry us away like the wind.

International Standard Version (©2012)
All of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous acts are like a filthy rag; we all shrivel up like a leaf, and like the wind, our iniquities sweep us away.

NET Bible (©2006)
We are all like one who is unclean, all our so-called righteous acts are like a menstrual rag in your sight. We all wither like a leaf; our sins carry us away like the wind.

GOD'S WORD® Translation (©1995)
We've all become unclean, and all our righteous acts are like permanently stained rags. All of us shrivel like leaves, and our sins carry us away like the wind.

King James 2000 Bible (©2003)
But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.

American King James Version
But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.

American Standard Version
For we are all become as one that is unclean, and all our righteousnesses are as a polluted garment: and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, take us away.

Douay-Rheims Bible
And we are all become as one unclean, and all our justices as the rag of a menstruous woman: and we have all fallen as a leaf, and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.

Darby Bible Translation
And we are all become as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all fade as a leaf, and our iniquities, like the wind, have carried us away;

English Revised Version
For we are all become as one that is unclean, and all our righteousnesses are as a polluted garment: and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, take us away.

Webster's Bible Translation
But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.

World English Bible
For we have all become as one who is unclean, and all our righteousness is as a polluted garment: and we all fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, take us away.

Young's Literal Translation
And we are as unclean -- all of us, And as a garment passing away, all our righteous acts; And we fade as a leaf -- all of us. And our iniquities as wind do take us away.
Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary

64:6-12 The people of God, in affliction, confess and bewail their sins, owning themselves unworthy of his mercy. Sin is that abominable thing which the Lord hates. Our deeds, whatever they may seem to be, if we think to merit by them at God's hand, are as rags, and will not cover us; filthy rags, and will but defile us. Even our few good works in which there is real excellence, as fruits of the Spirit, are so defective and defiled as done by us, that they need to be washed in the fountain open for sin and uncleanness. It bodes ill when prayer is kept back. To pray, is by faith to take hold of the promises the Lord has made of his good-will to us, and to plead them; to take hold of him, earnestly begging him not to leave us; or soliciting his return. They brought their troubles upon themselves by their own folly. Sinners are blasted, and then carried away, by the wind of their own iniquity; it withers and then ruins them. When they made themselves as an unclean thing, no wonder that God loathed them.


Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary

6. unclean thing—legally unclean, as a leper. True of Israel, everywhere now cut off by unbelief and by God's judgments from the congregation of the saints.

righteousness—plural, "uncleanness" extended to every particular act of theirs, even to their prayers and praises. True of the best doings of the unregenerate (Php 3:6-8; Tit 1:15; Heb 11:6).

filthy rags—literally, a "menstruous rag" (Le 15:33; 20:18; La 1:17).

fade … leaf—(Ps 90:5, 6).

 

[Winman]

Well, you just look real close at all those leaves as you drive around this week, and see what God tells you. :thumbsup:

 

[Iconoclast]

I will be driving through Minnesota,North Dakota,and into Montana, tommorow..so i might not see many leaves,lol.....alot of farms,cows, and then some mountains,and valleys...maybe pine trees...lol

Do not fear Winman....

 

[Winman]

​

I will be driving through Minnesota,North Dakota,and into Montana, tommorow..so i might not see many leaves,lol.....alot of farms,cows, and then some mountains,and valleys...maybe pine trees...lol

Do not fear Winman....

Oh, I think you already know what you will see.

 

[Winman]

Oh, by the way, I used to drive trucks when I was a young man, not the big rigs like you, but cutaways. 5 speed if I remember correctly. I used to drive all over Florida, but I would always get home at night. I did that for a year or two. I enjoyed it, but my back and neck did not.

 

[Iconoclast]

Oh, by the way, I used to drive trucks when I was a young man, not the big rigs like you, but cutaways. 5 speed if I remember correctly. I used to drive all over Florida, but I would always get home at night. I did that for a year or two. I enjoyed it, but my back and neck did not.

I have under achieved in life,and to an extent have reaped what I sowed.Thankfully God in His providence gives many opportunities for gospel discussion with all manner of persons that come into my path.
I have had some back issues,requiring steroid injections in order to be able to continue.I believe the prayers of several in My Home church have sustained me.
The back and forth on BB....helps keep me sharp in dealing with the unsaved,and cultists that I meet daily ,and God has given several great openings that I would not have had with my other jobs.

 

[Winman]

I have under achieved in life,and to an extent have reaped what I sowed.Thankfully God in His providence gives many opportunities for gospel discussion with all manner of persons that come into my path.
I have had some back issues,requiring steroid injections in order to be able to continue.I believe the prayers of several in My Home church have sustained me.
The back and forth on BB....helps keep me sharp in dealing with the unsaved,and cultists that I meet daily ,and God has given several great openings that I would not have had with my other jobs.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with being a truck driver. Truck drivers drive the American economy, it is truck drivers that accounts for America's great efficiency in delivering products. It is amazing actually. The reason communist countries fail is because they do not know how to get food from the farm to the grocery store before it rots.

So, pride is not good, but you are performing a VITAL service. There is nothing to be ashamed in any honest work.

Thank God for truck drivers! :thumbsup:

 

[DrJamesAch]

That's true...as far as it goes....but Augustine also supported Prostitution, and (again) physical and torturous persecution of the "heathen"...Augustine was garbage really.

I respect neither Augustine nor Calvin.......but, that isn't the point.......we have beings like C.H. SPURGEON to deal with....and such creatures agreed with much or most of what is commonly known as "Calvinism" today....
SPURGEON was, essentially a "Calvinist"...so was Whitefield, so was William Carrey (father of modern Baptist Missions).........the particular name of "Calvin" (as a man) must be separated from the idea as a systematic explanation of Soteriology....

Brother....so do I...I seem to recall that you and I have BOTH demonstrated that Calvin as a person was a veritable BEAST of a human being...(but he was also a rather sissy form of "Calvinist" anyway) since he was Infra-lapsarian and he was too much of a wuss to admit to "double-predestination" as well....
The TERM
"Calvinism" is merely a nomenclature which we find convenient to explain certain Theological notions...That's all.


Brother.....Calvin was a BEAST a BEAST (I'm pretty sure I have sufficiently staked my claim as a loather of Calvin PERSONALLY as a person and human being)...the history is irrefutable that John Calvin was nasty, brutish, un-regenerate....wicked, and he had a thirst for blood unlike any other reformer of his era....Even fellow "Calvinist" (he hates the term) Saturn-Neptune knows this...
We are on the same side as far as Calvin's personal history goes.....but, well, (thank the maker) we aren't on "Online Baptist" either wherein we aren't permitted to debate REAL topics either....

"Calvinism" is mere nomenclature at THIS point of the debate....and disparraging Calvin's personal character isn't particularly meaningful....For crying out-loud....Calvin was as sissy a "Calvinist" as one gets!...He was "Infra-lapsarian" at minimum....and he CLEARLY NEVER had the Hutzpah to admit to "double-pre-destination" either....frankly....as far as "Calvinism" goes...our brother Icon is far more "Calvinistic" that John Calvin himself was.

(That's actually and un-equivocally true...Beza had more influence on the modern definition of "Calvinism" than Calvin did)

However.......Calvin was a veritable Devil.......(I agree with you), but the Theological notions which are conveniently described as "Calvinism".....are legit.....

BTW: as proof in point, even though you don't know it yet....You are also a classic "Arminian" as well...You simply bought into the line that an "Arminian" doesn't believe in "eternal security"....They often do..."Arminians" always have....they are simply terms and they are convenient. They simply summarize Theological systems.

The problem I have with this premise is that we know that it is not really Calvinism, but Augustinianism, but the problem that Calvinists have is that some depart from giving Calvin total credit for it, but won't admit that they are not really Calvinists. Or even those who in Reformed circles attempt to distance themselves from Calvins's character, but only accept his theology won't admit that Calvin's articulation of TULIP, even if articulation of it is all he is responsible for, is still the basis of the majority of their theology.

How many Calvinists or Reformists readily admit that Augustine is the foundation of their theology? THEY DON'T because they don't want to be identified with a Roman Catholic heretic.

I can agree for sake of discussion among Non Calvinists that his character would be irrelevant because it would be a moot point with the understanding that we have about Calvin. But if you haven't noticed the Calvinists who accept Calvin as the champion of those theological notions defend his character to defend his theology. Some have even posed Calvin "Man of the Millennium".

Thus to the extent that those who defend the character of Calvin to prove that God used a great man to articulate either his theology or Augustine's or expounding on Augustine's, it is not irrelevant to show that the man's character is a complete contradiction to the men that God used to expound theology. Other's may come to different conclusions about other "theologians" and rightfully (or wrongfully) disagree with theology BASED ON THE THEOLOGY. Calvin is an exception where it is perfectly legitimate to question his theology based on his character because those who embrace Calvinism according to Calvin rely on Calvin's articulations, not the source of those articulations, as the premise for their theology.

 

[DrJamesAch]

.

Are you a hyper-dispie???

Nope

I think you are cutting hairs. Plus, many academic dispies would disagree. Have you ever read the Journal for Dispensational Theology??? As to the historicity of dispieism, where was it ever practiced???

I don't base my theology or dispensationalism on whether some academic scholar agrees or disagrees. The truth of the Bible does not depend on whether 500 people agree with dispensational truth, and 499 do not. If those scholars looked at the issue more carefully, if they have even considered it at all, they would realize that dispensationalism is NOT theology any more than hermenuetics is theology. Theology by definition (Theo logos) is the study of God, not HOW to study God. The conclusion is the theology, how you got there is not.

That is laughable. I attack dispieism b/c you think John of Patmos wrote to 7 churches in Asia minor about the RCC. And realized eschatology is not new. Have you read Augustine???

Yes I have read "City of God" and many of his other writings which is why some of us Non Cals have consistently stated that Calvinism, particularly when it comes to amellenialism is based on Augy.

The tree of life is in the new creation... notice it links w/ the garden of eden... oh but wait, you are blind to seeing Genesis in Rev.

You are still obfuscating the issues. If God's intent and determination is to restore the new world exactly as the first, that still does not tell us what is going to occur in between to get us there, and Revelation does.

As far as the kingdom, why does it have to be in Jerusalem? Why does it have to be physical? This earthly Jerusalem is not the goal. Thus Rev demonstrates that New Jerusalem is the goal. Heaven on earth.

It doesn't HAVE to be physical, BUT IT IS because the word of God SAYS SO. It should be as simple as that unless you allegorize the entire Bible. If you interpret the Bible allegorically, is there ever a time when is it interpreted literally. You could say Jesus didn't literally die on a cross, it was just a figure of speech to demonstrate suffering. You could he didn't literally raise from the dead (which some actually teach) but that it was only figurative.

Which brings up a crucial point: Did Jesus die physically and literally? and did He raise from the dead, physically and literally? If you answer yes to both of the above, then how do you justify what you interpret literally, and what you interpret allegorically? There must be an objective and concrete rule of interpretation of everything is merely subjective including how anyone interprets whatever YOU say.

If you are silly enough to read apocalyptic literally, then your theology will match in silliness. Isaiah used the same kind of language for Babylon's fall.

So in other words, when Jesus said that He must be delivered into the hands of man and be crucified, that was literal (perhaps, at this point I don't even know if you believe THAT), but when He said hereafter you shall SEE the Son of Man coming in the clouds of heaven, that was figurative?

Did Babylon really fall or not? Was Babylon a real place that is now currently Iraq, or was Babylon merely figurative since it is actually used in a figurative sense in Revelation 17-18 to describe Rome? Was there ever REALLY a Babylon and was Nebechadnezzar REALLY a king?

And as for Rev. 1:7, that is an allusion to Dan 7:13 where the Messiah is going TO God not FROM God. It is a statement of vindication as Jesus is enthroned.

No it is not an "allusion" to Daniel 7:13 any more than Jesus ascension into heaven was an illusion.

The disciples asked the question in Acts 1, "When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?:

Notice the question:

1. At this time which shows that the kingdom was NOT in effect when Jesus ascended
2. It was in fact the KINGDOM that was being referred to
3. And it was the kingdom TO ISRAEL

After that Jesus ascended and the angel said "why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven" Acts 1:11

The return of Christ will be "IN LIKE MANNER as ye have SEEN HIM GO". In Revelation 1:7, they see HIS PIERCED SIDE. Why go through all the details of WHAT THEY WILL SEE if it was only figurative?

And why does dispieism get to monopolize all forms of futurism. I hold to a future return of Jesus and a future consummation of all things.

If you hold to a future of ANY sort, then you are a dispensationalist. That is a fact that anti-dispensationlist refuse to admit. Once Jesus returns and causes a change in economies, you are holding to at least one dispensational position.

AGain... from where did you get your "doctorate of theology." I believe if you are bold enough to call yourself "Dr" and post that you have a doctorate of theology, then you should be willing to tell us where you earned it (if you did earn it). Are you ashamed or hiding something????

I have said in the introduction forum that I don't care what you call me. Iconoclast regular just says "ACH" and that's fine with me. It's a forum name. Why do you use "Greektim" if that's not YOUR real name?
I don't list my school location because of something that happened to my brother and law's wife and son, and the brother of a friend of mine who (when the friend was the actual target, not the brother) who were all murdered as a result of information obtained from where I went to school. My dissertation was on Preterism (60 pages). I did not publish it (for obvious reasons stated above) but will scan it and put it online eventually.

 

[saturneptune]

Again... from where did you get your "doctorate of theology." I believe if you are bold enough to call yourself "Dr" and post that you have a doctorate of theology, then you should be willing to tell us where you earned it (if you did earn it). Are you ashamed or hiding something????

Here is exactly where he got his degree.

http://almedauniversity.org/credentialing/phd-programs.html

Notice the rigorous academic standards.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

Where did John Calvin's Doctorate in Theology come from?

 

[preachinjesus]

Where did John Calvin's Doctorate in Theology come from?

Though education in his day was different than ours:

Collège de Montaigu (philosophy)
University of Orléans (law)
University of Bourges (law and classics)

These were only among the top schools in Europe of the time.

 

[DrJamesAch]

Here is exactly where he got his degree.

http://almedauniversity.org/credentialing/phd-programs.html

Notice the rigorous academic standards.

Wrong country:tonofbricks: