is calvinism based upon John Calvin, Or Upon Jesus And the Gospel?

[Yeshua1]

When two do not agree, they both cannot be right. They could both be wrong.

What is the standard? The holy fathers and post Reformation commentators are all in the same category: subject to human error from their depravity. Yep, Augustine and Chauvin were not infallible. They were also pedobaptists.

Why do many insist on putting extraneous biblical doctrine on the same level as the whole counsel of the infallible Word of God?

The fact that Jon Chauvin, aka John Calvin, was a pedobaptist, a practice he got from his childhood religion, should tell us he is not worthy of a pedestal.

There is only one worthy-- we crucified Him.

Even so, come Lord Jesus.

Bro. James

NONE here put him on the Cross, ONLY jesus qualifies for that!

NONE have him an Apostle either!

 

[HeirofSalvation]

Not an impartial source.

"Castellio" was a "Primary" source....and that is defined as someone who was immediately and directly involved in the situation. A "Primary" source is more factually powerful than anything you have YET to cite.

The Historical facts are thus:
Castellio was a friend of Calvin who KNEW HIM PERSONALLY. That makes him a credible source.

Calvin had to obey the law as everyone else.

FALSE.............Calvin stood as Servetus's "accuser"....it was his "expert witness" which was used to condemn him........instead of staying in prison (as Genevan law required) he levelled his accusations by proxy........thus having someone ELSE stay in prison during the outcome of the trial.

That is historic fact.......and you will NOT respond to it......you will ignore it.

He was not a magistrate, as I have said over and over again. He was a member, the leading member of the consistory. He was not serve in a civil capacity.

He officially stood as Servetus's accuser. BY LAW.........the "accuser" must submit himself to the imprisonment of the individual which they seek to condemn.

Instead of submitting to law (and Calvin had a Juris Doctorate in Law) Calvin chose to send his accusations by proxy and instead served merely as the "expert-witness".......
Mainly because he was too much of a GIRL to be a man and follow the law as written.

 

[DrJamesAch]

When two do not agree, they both cannot be right. They could both be wrong.

What is the standard? The holy fathers and post Reformation commentators are all in the same category: subject to human error from their depravity. Yep, Augustine and Chauvin were not infallible. They were also pedobaptists.

Why do many insist on putting extraneous biblical doctrine on the same level as the whole counsel of the infallible Word of God?

The fact that Jon Chauvin, aka John Calvin, was a pedobaptist, a practice he got from his childhood religion, should tell us he is not worthy of a pedestal.

There is only one worthy-- we crucified Him.

Even so, come Lord Jesus.

Bro. James

What are the standards?

CALVINISM. Calvin's Institutes, Westminster Confession, Belgium Confession, Philadelphia Confession, Saturday Morning Mass Confession (oops, sorry that's Catholic, but my what a remarkable resemblance).

Fundamental Baptists: THE BIBLE.

 

[saturneptune]

What are the standards?

CALVINISM. Calvin's Institutes, Westminster Confession, Belgium Confession, Philadelphia Confession, Saturday Morning Mass Confession (oops, sorry that's Catholic, but my what a remarkable resemblance).

Fundamental Baptists: THE BIBLE.

You are quite a paradox. How can you be so right on the character of Calvin and Baptist distinctives, and so wrong on sovereignty?

 

[HeirofSalvation]

You are quite a paradox. How can you be so right on the character of Calvin and Baptist distinctives, and so wrong on sovereignty?

LOL........because he's not "wrong" on "Sovereignty"..............I might ask you the SAME question......

How is it that YOU "GET-IT" about the Universal Church and the character of Calvin............and yet you STILL are "Calvinist" in Soteriology?

You understand the "Baptist Distinctives" and yet you believe a view of Soteriology not normally connected with "baptists" or their distinctives........

S.N...............You are as paradoxical as Dr. J. is......
:wavey:

 

[DrJamesAch]

I beg your pardons, I am not a pterodactyl

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I beg your pardons, I am not a pterodactyl

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wj5I6oyoPXs :laugh:

 

[HeirofSalvation]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wj5I6oyoPXs :laugh:

I "Laughed out Loud"!............God Bless YOU E.W.F. for bringing some levity and joy to some of these discussions....

You are an "encourager"........ and you act thus.

I appreciate you.

One day (despite your status as a Yankee) I would love to toast your posts with a cool glass of Chimay "Trappist Ale"!...

I "LIKE" a lot of people on this board..........I've never met someone I would rather have a beer with than you!

God Bless you Brother! :godisgood:

 

[saturneptune]

LOL........because he's not "wrong" on "Sovereignty"..............I might ask you the SAME question......

How is it that YOU "GET-IT" about the Universal Church and the character of Calvin............and yet you STILL are "Calvinist" in Soteriology?

You understand the "Baptist Distinctives" and yet you believe a view of Soteriology not normally connected with "baptists" or their distinctives........

S.N...............You are as paradoxical as Dr. J. is......
:wavey:

One does not have to think Calvin was a saint to believe in God's sovereignty. Also, believing in God's sovereignty does not go counter to Baptist distinctives. Maybe you failed the matching test.

 

[Rippon]

"Castellio" was a "Primary" source....and that is defined as someone who was immediately and directly involved in the situation.

No,he wasn't a primary source. He was banned from Geneva 9 years before the Servetus incident.

Calvin stood as Servetus's "accuser"....it was his "expert witness" which was used to condemn him........instead of staying in prison (as Genevan law required) he levelled his accusations by proxy........thus having someone ELSE stay in prison during the outcome of the trial.

That is historic fact.......and you will NOT respond to it......you will ignore it.

You are quite deficient in historical facts as youi have amply demonstated in prior threads.

Quoting from Jean Cadier's book The Man God Mastered,on page 159 it relates the following:"He [Servetus] was recognized amongst the congregation by some of the faithful,denounced to the criminal lieutenant and arrested. A complaint was lodged against him by Calvin's secretary,Nicolas de la Fontaine who,in accordance with the genevan law,was imprisoned at the same time as the man he had accused."

 

[HeirofSalvation]

One does not have to think Calvin was a saint to believe in God's sovereignty. Also, believing in God's sovereignty does not go counter to Baptist distinctives. Maybe you failed the matching test.

No............they don't have to.

"Sovereignty" is the only concept in Theology proper which you still fail to comprehend my brother

Once you get the "Sovereignty" facet of God's attributes........................................

you'll actually drop the rest of the Calvinist assertions like a bad habit. You weren't born to be a "Calvinist".....your whole soul screams against it.

The problem is.......

That Calvinist Polemicists have taught you that God's "Sovereignty" is only rightly expressed within the Calvinist schema. That's not true. It never was. If the Calvinist view is correct..............it has NOTHING to do with "Sovereignty" as a facet of God's being.........It has EVERYTHING to do with God's NATURE . The non-Calvinist argument has NOTHING to do with "Sovereignty"......it has EVERYTHING to do with properly defining God's Nature.
I encourage you to watch this full link from Jerry Walls which defines the issue in terms of "Sovereignty" and yet exposes the mistake the Calvinist schema makes with regard to God's character.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Daomzm3nyIg

Winman's link was outstanding..........and Jerry Wall's post will be repeatedly posed against Calvinists until it is responded to correctly...........

It WON'T go away.

 

[Van]

Yet another falsehood

have you ever asked why the sovereignty of God bothers you so much, and why free will is so appealing?

Yeshua1 simply makes us falsehoods and posts them. God's sovereignty is something to worship and adore. So Yeshua1 claims it bothers me. Fiction on top of fiction.

Misdirection, misinformation, distortion, deception, are the stock and trade of Yeshua1. He disparages others using fictional charges in post after post after post.

Folks, scriptural truth is appealing, and it denies we are always free to choose Christ, we can become hardened and lose what limited spiritual ability we have. We need cultivation, planting and watering to trust fully in Christ. So scripture teaches limited spiritual ability, and even that can be lost.

One thing is certain, Calvinism is not based on what scripture says, it is based on unwarranted extrapolations of scripture. Scripture says no one seeks God. Calvinism rewrites it to say, no one seeks God at any time. Never mind Paul saying the Jews were seeking God through works.

Calvinism says our election for salvation was unconditional. However, 2 Thessalonians 2:13 says our election for salvation was through faith in the truth.

Calvinism says Christ did not die for all mankind, yet scripture says He laid down His life as a ransom for all.

Calvinism says the call is through irresistible grace, and once called nothing can prevent a person from coming to faith. However Matthew 23:13 has men entering heaven, who are then blocked by false teachers presenting false doctrine.

Calvinism is based on the inventions of men as they speculated and expanded the range and scope of biblical truth. Speculation is the mother of mistaken doctrine. We should ask ourselves, what is the least scripture could be saying and not add to it.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

No,he wasn't a primary source. He was banned from Geneva 9 years before the Servetus incident.

You don't understand the discipline of "history" it appears............"Historically" as a legitimate Academic Discipline considers "Castellio" a "Primary" source...........you deny that truth by claiming that he was "banned" from Geneva 9 years earlier????

So What??..................Who Banned him? Calvin???????? DUH..............of course Calvin banned him........what else is new?

I've quoted Primary source after Primary source to you..........from Calvin, (who was there) to Castellio............

and yet you appeal to people who lived HUNDREDS of years after....

You aren't smart......you are an annoying flea who who has obfuscated a reasonable understanding of history.

 

[Rippon]

You don't understand the discipline of "history" it appears............"Historically" as a legitimate Academic Discipline considers "Castellio" a "Primary" source...........you deny that truth by claiming that he was "banned" from Geneva 9 years earlier????

He wasn't there.

HoS has obfuscated a reasonable understanding of history.

You can say that again!

 

[Alive in Christ]

Winman posted...

The doctrines of Calvinism are based on the Bible. Any honest person would say that even if they disagree with the interpretations.

No, Calvinism ASSUMES it is true, and simply cherry picks scripture to support it's assumption, ignoring and rejecting volumes of scripture that contradicts and refutes it.

Much of Calvinism cannot be found in the scriptures whatsoever, such as Total Inability. There is not one word of scripture that says God cursed man's moral nature so that he is compelled to do evil and cannot choose good. ZERO.

Calvinism twists, perverts, and redefines scripture. For example, Calvinism redefines much scripture that says Jesus died for ALL men, redefining ALL to mean only the ELECT.

Absolutely. Agree 100% Calvinism is overflowing with false teaching and heretical doctrine.

 

[Yeshua1]

What are the standards?

CALVINISM. Calvin's Institutes, Westminster Confession, Belgium Confession, Philadelphia Confession, Saturday Morning Mass Confession (oops, sorry that's Catholic, but my what a remarkable resemblance).

Fundamental Baptists: THE BIBLE.

Idon't know ANy calvinist here posting that would say ANYTHING other than the Bible is their primary source for all doctrines/practices!

 

[Yeshua1]

No............they don't have to.

"Sovereignty" is the only concept in Theology proper which you still fail to comprehend my brother

Once you get the "Sovereignty" facet of God's attributes........................................

you'll actually drop the rest of the Calvinist assertions like a bad habit. You weren't born to be a "Calvinist".....your whole soul screams against it.

The problem is.......

That Calvinist Polemicists have taught you that God's "Sovereignty" is only rightly expressed within the Calvinist schema. That's not true. It never was. If the Calvinist view is correct..............it has NOTHING to do with "Sovereignty" as a facet of God's being.........It has EVERYTHING to do with God's NATURE . The non-Calvinist argument has NOTHING to do with "Sovereignty"......it has EVERYTHING to do with properly defining God's Nature.
I encourage you to watch this full link from Jerry Walls which defines the issue in terms of "Sovereignty" and yet exposes the mistake the Calvinist schema makes with regard to God's character.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Daomzm3nyIg

Winman's link was outstanding..........and Jerry Wall's post will be repeatedly posed against Calvinists until it is responded to correctly...........

It WON'T go away.

is there ANYTHING taht ever happened in history that God did not either do Himself, or permit others to do, and still retaincontrol over what they did nd said, yet still they chose to freely do it?

 

[Yeshua1]

Yeshua1 simply makes us falsehoods and posts them. God's sovereignty is something to worship and adore. So Yeshua1 claims it bothers me. Fiction on top of fiction.

Misdirection, misinformation, distortion, deception, are the stock and trade of Yeshua1. He disparages others using fictional charges in post after post after post.

Folks, scriptural truth is appealing, and it denies we are always free to choose Christ, we can become hardened and lose what limited spiritual ability we have. We need cultivation, planting and watering to trust fully in Christ. So scripture teaches limited spiritual ability, and even that can be lost.

One thing is certain, Calvinism is not based on what scripture says, it is based on unwarranted extrapolations of scripture. Scripture says no one seeks God. Calvinism rewrites it to say, no one seeks God at any time. Never mind Paul saying the Jews were seeking God through works.

Calvinism says our election for salvation was unconditional. However, 2 Thessalonians 2:13 says our election for salvation was through faith in the truth.

Calvinism says Christ did not die for all mankind, yet scripture says He laid down His life as a ransom for all.

Calvinism says the call is through irresistible grace, and once called nothing can prevent a person from coming to faith. However Matthew 23:13 has men entering heaven, who are then blocked by false teachers presenting false doctrine.

Calvinism is based on the inventions of men as they speculated and expanded the range and scope of biblical truth. Speculation is the mother of mistaken doctrine. We should ask ourselves, what is the least scripture could be saying and not add to it.

Your verses are out of contex, do not support your beliefs!

Again, what about God being soveregn "bugs you" so much?

 

[Yeshua1]

Winman posted...





Absolutely. Agree 100% Calvinism is overflowing with false teaching and heretical doctrine.

there is NOTHING in itthat is heretical teaching!

You can say that we misunderstand the bible, but NOT that we are heretics, as that suppossses not really saved!

 

[HeirofSalvation]

is there ANYTHING taht ever happened in history that God did not either do Himself, or permit others to do, and still retaincontrol over what they did nd said, yet still they chose to freely do it?

NOPE!!!! NONE NADA!.................

It's the sheer stupidity in the portion I bolded which has absolutely NO Biblical merit.

The portion I bolded is ONLY submitted by stupid or deceptive people Yeshua.........

That's the part which is a lie.