Can Armenian Calvinists Co-Exist?

[Rippon]

No, you are categorically wrong. God does not accomodate opposites being true.Spurgeon had given an example of some folks not be able to reconcile mans' responsibility with divine foreordination. Calvinists have no problem with that. It's not a contradiction, although many on the other side of the theological aisle think so.

Rip: In post #34 Allan said in response to the above: "On both sides you mean."

And like I was saying Calvinists have no problem reconciling God's foreordination with the responsibility of man. So it is not a problem "on both sides". Calvinists have no such problems or tensions.The non-Cals have a tension problem with this. They need to take some Bible pills to relieve their theological headache.

 

[Allan]

No, you are categorically wrong. God does not accomodate opposites being true.Spurgeon had given an example of some folks not be able to reconcile mans' responsibility with divine foreordination. Calvinists have no problem with that. It's not a contradiction, although many on the other side of the theological aisle think so.

Rip: In post #34 Allan said in response to the above: "On both sides you mean."

And like I was saying Calvinists have no problem reconciling God's foreordination with the responsibility of man. So it is not a problem "on both sides". Calvinists have no such problems or tensions.The non-Cals have a tension problem with this. They need to take some Bible pills to relieve their theological headache.

Playing deaf and dumb doesn't change the FACT that Calvinist DO see tensions in the scripture - See post #42.

It's ok, you can breathe normally.

 

[Allan]

I repeat: Why does Christ refer to Himself as the Great Shepherd? If folks like Allan think that Christ died for the goats too, then there is no particular reason for Christ to be known as the Shepherd of the sheep. Scripture makes it abundantly clear that Christ specifically died for His sheep. Christ never said He died for the goats. Christ never said that goats turn into sheep. Christ is not a goat-herder!

The Lord has sovereign discrimination. He places the Church in counter-distinction to the world. He places the elect against the condemned. He puts the sheep up against the goats. Allan is doing some unwarranted mixing where the Bible shows definitive lines of separation.

Christians need to distinguish between things that differ. Scripture tells us very plainly what they are.

Of course He calls Himself the Great Shepard - duh! He is talking about His followers being His sheep and deals with the relationship between God and Man in that analogy. The shepard lays down His life that His sheep will exist and continue. If He did not lay down His life (like the hired help) they would be stolen or all die and be food for the wild animals and thus be no longer His because they have been taken away from Him in one form or another.

That aside we KNOW the Atonement was for ALL of the Nation of Israel but we also KNOW that not all of the Nation of Israel was saved because it is by faith that the propitiation is received (Rom 3:23). It has an intended purpose (to redeem those of faith) but does not negate the fact it was made for all. Jesus fulfilled the Law exactly and thus His life as an Atonement holds the same.

The lamb was slain for the sake of them all that it would save those who would believe. The purpose for dieing for all was for all those of faith to be redeemed and all those who are not of faith to be condemned.

 

[Allan]

OK. Say what you want henceforth - I'm done answering these now.

Have a blessed day in the Lord Rippon.

 

[David Lamb]

This thread isn't about salvation or Rom 9 or any of the rest of the stuff you keep on about.. however suffice to say Rom 9 is about the Nation of Israel (vs 23 - His people ) and the Gentile Nations (vs 22 - those not His people).

Regarding the thread - (or back to it) There are some who can not be unified with those who are different on some theological points and there are those who can and will continue to do the Lords work side-by-side

In my view we went off-topic a long while before the Rippon - Allan interchange! The OP was not about whether Calvinists and Arminians could exist or work side by side, but whether one person could be both Calvinist and Arminian at the same time. To quote the OP:

I wonder [out loud] if there is such an animal as an Armenian/
Calvinist in this world of "mixed" every things.

​

I think the confusion comes from the thread title: "Can Armenian (sic) Calvinists Co-exist?" The OP seems to indicate that the actual subject intended was: "Is There Such a person as an Arminian Calvinist?"

 

[pinoybaptist]

In my view we went off-topic a long while before the Rippon - Allan interchange! The OP was not about whether Calvinists and Arminians could exist or work side by side, but whether one person could be both Calvinist and Arminian at the same time. To quote the OP:

I wonder [out loud] if there is such an animal as an Armenian/
Calvinist in this world of "mixed" every things.


​

I think the confusion comes from the thread title: "Can Armenian (sic) Calvinists Co-exist?" The OP seems to indicate that the actual subject intended was: "Is There Such a person as an Arminian Calvinist?"

So let's go back to what the OP intended, then.
Is there such a person as an Arminian Calvinist ?
Again, my answer is : that person will be an aberration.

He' ll be like that little girl in India born with four arms and four legs.
Or something like that.
Eventually, the desire will be for just two arms and two legs.

 

[sag38]

Piney's answer shows why the two will not be able to work together in most cases. Seems that it's becoming a hill to die on for many.

 

[psalms109:31]

Neither

I am in the middle some where that only scripture, not mens Ideas, can show the truth.

 

[Allan]

In my view we went off-topic a long while before the Rippon - Allan interchange! The OP was not about whether Calvinists and Arminians could exist or work side by side, but whether one person could be both Calvinist and Arminian at the same time. To quote the OP:

I wonder [out loud] if there is such an animal as an Armenian/
Calvinist in this world of "mixed" every things.

​

I think the confusion comes from the thread title: "Can Armenian (sic) Calvinists Co-exist?" The OP seems to indicate that the actual subject intended was: "Is There Such a person as an Arminian Calvinist?"

LoL... Your right!

I have to agree that there is no specific animal so named.

In order to be a Calvinist you need to hold in the very least the 5 basic priniciples of Calvinism (TULIP) and it is the same with being an Arminian.

You can lean more toward one view or another but that no more makes you one or the other than leaning on post makes you a fence. There are however other theological views than Calvinism and Arminian.

 

[Plain Old Bill]

Rippon I see no Christian love, understanding or charity in your answers and questions when talking to Allan. You must be very young and unpolished. I certainly hope you are not the pastor of any church. If you are I pity your congregation. You are exactly the man people are talking about when they speak of mean spiritedness and calvinist in the same sentence. What a wonderful witness for Christ you are.

 

[Rippon]

No, you are categorically wrong. God does not accomodate opposites being true.

Rip: To which Allan responds :"Again -- opinion."Well, my 'opinion' is factual. Since you dismiss it as merely an opinion, I suppose you believe that God does accomodate opposites being true?!

 

[Rippon]

There are however other theological views than Calvinism and Arminian.

Aside from being an Amyrauldian, I do not not think there exists another view in which someone can legitimately be a Christian. A semi-Pelagian might just squeak by perhaps if their verbalized theology differs from their prayers.

 

[Rippon]

I said Spurgeon agreed there were tensions in scripture ...

Where does Spurgeon say there are tensions in Scripture ?

 

[Rippon]

There is no such thing as a Calminian.

A Calvinist can't hold to less than the 5 points.

Calvinists hold to full-fledged Calvinism.

Being Calvinistic could be applied to someone inclined, but not embracing Calvinism entirely.

Arminians are the counterparts of people holding Calvinistic views.They are inclined to a system of thought which is largely synergistic and tending toward semi-Pelagianism.

 

[Rippon]

You must be very young and unpolished. I certainly hope you are not the pastor of any church.

Rip: POB, you are lying. You know who I am, my age, job etc. We have exchanged numerous PM's over the years. During our last exchange I wished you a Happy Birthday. Why you have fabricated things here is a mystery.Lying about me lessens your credibility.Please engage in a huge measure of truth-telling.

Did you ever complete The Institutes?

 

[sag38]

Some here make Calvinism seem to be a tenate of the faith that is required for salvation, for proper evangelism, and a test for fellowship. In addition they can become quite ugly about it ripping anyone who disagrees. It's sad.

 

[David Lamb]

Some here make Calvinism seem to be a tenate of the faith that is required for salvation, for proper evangelism, and a test for fellowship. In addition they can become quite ugly about it ripping anyone who disagrees. It's sad.

That sort of thing is sad, I agree, but I could with equal validity say, "Some here make non-Calvinism seem to be a tenet of the faith that is required for salvation, for proper evangelism, and a test for fellowship. In addition they can become quite ugly about it ripping anyone who disagrees. It's sad." What I mean is that there are some posters in both "camps" who are gracious, and even when they disagree with someone, they don't resort to ugliness. Then there are other posters in both "camps" who are not gracious, and seem able disagree only in ugly ways. But I would suggest that most of us fall into a third group - we mean to be gracious, polite, and honourable, but from time to time we fail, and our posts come across as cruel, hard-hearted and arrogant. Please forgive me for any of my posts that have been like that.

 

[mparkerfd20]

Rippon I see no Christian love, understanding or charity in your answers and questions when talking to Allan. You must be very young and unpolished. I certainly hope you are not the pastor of any church. If you are I pity your congregation. You are exactly the man people are talking about when they speak of mean spiritedness and calvinist in the same sentence. What a wonderful witness for Christ you are.

I've always felt the same myself when reading a lot of the posts here. I agree with the majority of Rip's theological views, but where is the love? Why must you always be right at all costs? Including trying to tear the other person down that doesn't agree with you?

That sort of thing is sad, I agree, but I could with equal validity say, "Some here make non-Calvinism seem to be a tenet of the faith that is required for salvation, for proper evangelism, and a test for fellowship. In addition they can become quite ugly about it ripping anyone who disagrees. It's sad." What I mean is that there are some posters in both "camps" who are gracious, and even when they disagree with someone, they don't resort to ugliness. Then there are other posters in both "camps" who are not gracious, and seem able disagree only in ugly ways. But I would suggest that most of us fall into a third group - we mean to be gracious, polite, and honourable, but from time to time we fail, and our posts come across as cruel, hard-hearted and arrogant. Please forgive me for any of my posts that have been like that.

David... I have always throroughly enjoyed reading your posts. You are for the most part always courteous and graceful, even in disagreement. I believe some in both camps become almost too fascinated with the pride of being right. :tear:

 

[psalms109:31]

Pride

Pride is a problem, but don't confuse that with faith in the word of God.

Don't have pride in man's ideas only faith in God and His word

 

[canadyjd]

One thing, however, has proved profitable to me. I found Spurgeon's sermon on I Tim. 2:3+. I don't think Spurgeon is showing Arminian beliefs, here.

Although I consider myself "reformed", I don't believe the text to mean "all sorts of men" (although there is support for that view in context). I believe it means "all men". The focus, then, turns to what is the text really saying about God's "wish" or "desire". Spurgeon makes a distinction between God's "wish" and His decreed "will". I find myself in agreement with Spurgeon, here.

http://www.spurgeon.org/sermons/1516.htm

Does not the text mean that it is the wish of God that men should be saved? The word "wish" gives as much force to the original as it really requires, and the passage should run thus—"whose wish it is that all men should be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth." As it is my wish that it should be so, as it is your wish that it might be so, so it is God's wish that all men should be saved; for, assuredly, he is not less benevolent than we are. Then comes the question, "But if he wishes it to be so, why does he not make it so?…………. "

……There stands the text, and I believe that it is my Father's wish that "all men should be saved, and come to the knowledge of the truth." But I know, also, that he does not will it, so that he will save any one of them, unless they believe in his dear Son; for he has told us over and over that he will not. He will not save any man except he forsakes his sins, and turns to him with full purpose of heart: that I also know….

……And I know, also, that he has a people whom he will save, whom by his eternal love he has chosen, and whom by his eternal power he will deliver. I do not know how that squares with this; that is another of the things I do not know. If I go on telling you of all that I do not know, and of all that I do know, I will warrant you that the things that I do not know will be a hundred to one of the things that I do know. And so we will say no more about the matter, but just go on to the more practical part of the text. God's wish about man's salvation is this,—that men should be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth.

peace to youraying: