If you are not Reformed, you cannot believe in eternal security

It is a rule violation to question another posters salvation. If someone has questioned your salvation please report the post.

 

Nor the caricature of what non-Calvinists claim Calvinists believe.

 

Well, I obviously disagree and will provide a defense for my reply.

That James Arminius was more Church of Rome than Protestant is a horrible mischaracterization of the doctrine Arminius held. James Arminius was a student of Theodore Beza. He served as a professor of theology at Leiden until he died. Prior to his death he debated his teachings with Fransiscus Gomarus (who defended Beza’s position). The courts concluded Arminius’ teachings, “mostly relating to the subtle details of the doctrine of predestination, were of minor importance and could coexist”.

Your comment betrays an ignorance of history. Arminius’ teachings were orthodox Calvinism (except on those points he departed, evaluated pre-Dort). There is no evidence that James Arminius rejected the Reformed Theology that Theodore Beza praised him for holding in the letter he wrote on Arminius’ behalf (June 3, 1585), except on the points that had caused him to stumble before over predestination (and to be fair, John Calvin wrestled with the placement of Divine Sovereignty).

What distinguished the Reformers from Rome was not the doctrine of predestination (remember, the Anabaptists…who did not hold to a Calvinistic soteriology….had joined the protestant movement to the extent Martin Luther wrote of them as being with them but not “of them”). I understand that sometimes people get emotional when they find an “enemy” to fight, and they assign to that “enemy” false statements and conclusions that do not really belong. I understand it happens, but I really don’t understand why. You are wrong that Arminius’ doctrine was more Catholic than Reformed. He departed in a few, but important, points.

Hugo Grotius, Ordinum Hollandiae AC Westfrisiae Pietas (1613).

You are wrong that only “true Reformed Theology” is unique among all world religions because you replace Christianity with “true Reformed Theology”. A man can believe Reformed Theology and perish in Hell. A man cannot be a Christian and perish. The object of theology is to study and understand God while the object of Christianity is to know Christ. There is a difference.

You also seem to ignore the differences within Reformed Theology. You have the doctrine of Calvin, Luther, Zwingli, Beza, and Arminius on the Reformed side, but they all hold theologies that differ to a degree. And then there are those you deem outside of the faith (men who are outside of Reformed theology), like Petr Chelčický, Conrad Grebel, and Felix Manz. You exclude men like Ignatius, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus and Cyril of Alexandria.

 

How do you "almost" say something?

 

Can't take any action until somebody reports it. The only thing the Mods do without consulting the Admin Council is to remove profane or vulgar words/references. But even then we report it after the fact.

 

That's just ignorant. It's like saying everyone is either Southern Baptist or Free-will Baptist.

 

Actually it is very close to the truth. There is no middle ground. You either believe in total depravity or you don't. Unconditional election or you don't. Particular atonement or you don't. Efficacious grace or you don't. Preservation of the Saints or you don't.