Is calvinism devilish doctrine?

[TCGreek]

I never heard it put that way before (the part about scaraments for salvation). It would be funnier if I hadn't seen it practiced for real. I also could have gone through my whole life without learning about the Baptist purgatory. Too late now, I guess.

1. A person can change the label, but until the contents have been changed, it is what it is by nature: A baptist purgatory.

2. We do have a choice in what we believe.

 

[David Lamb]

Secondly and Personally, I prefer not to be spiritually identified with any other human being other than Jesus Christ. I am sure that is the true of most calvinists as well and therefore (IMO) they should drop the name (calvin) part.​

Acts 4:12 Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.​

HankD​

I wish we could, and indeed have stated in one of my posts (sorry, I can't remember which one, or even which forum) that I do not like the term "Calvinist". It suggests that the people it is applied to read the bible, plus Calvin's works, in order to arrive at what they believe. It seems even to have given you the impression, judging by your quote of Acts 4.12, that "calvinists" believe they are saved by John Calvin.

I prefer to be known as "reformed", in the sense that I believe the "Five Great Alones" of the Reformation, that salvation is by grace alone, through faith alone, because of Christ alone, to the glory of God alone, on the authority of Scripture alone.

Incidentally, although I refer to Calvin's commentaries from time to time (not very often, though), I have never, ever read any of Calvin's books.

 

[ReformedBaptist]

I wish we could, and indeed have stated in one of my posts (sorry, I can't remember which one, or even which forum) that I do not like the term "Calvinist". It suggests that the people it is applied to read the bible, plus Calvin's works, in order to arrive at what they believe. It seems even to have given you the impression, judging by your quote of Acts 4.12, that "calvinists" believe they are saved by John Calvin.

I prefer to be known as "reformed", in the sense that I believe the "Five Great Alones" of the Reformation, that salvation is by grace alone, through faith alone, because of Christ alone, to the glory of God alone, on the authority of Scripture alone.

Incidentally, although I refer to Calvin's commentaries from time to time (not very often, though), I have never, ever read any of Calvin's books.

For many years I had a predjudice against John Calvin. I had this because of how I heard others speak of him. One day, I slapped myself in the head and said, "Hey stupid, why don't you see if he is the ogre others make him out to be rather than taking heresay." Then I read some sermons by him. While I don't agree with everything Calvin taught, he is certainly one of the finest teachers the Lord has given the Church. If someone doesn't believe me, try reading just his overviews of the books of the Bible.

 

[David Lamb]

For many years I had a predjudice against John Calvin. I had this because of how I heard others speak of him. One day, I slapped myself in the head and said, "Hey stupid, why don't you see if he is the ogre others make him out to be rather than taking heresay." Then I read some sermons by him. While I don't agree with everything Calvin taught, he is certainly one of the finest teachers the Lord has given the Church. If someone doesn't believe me, try reading just his overviews of the books of the Bible.

Reading through my previous reply, I can see that I might have given the impression that I was anti-Calvin. That is definitely not the case. And I certainly wasn't boasting when I said that I had read none of Calvin's books (apart from referring to his commentaries); I was just trying to explain why I think the term "Calvinist" is so misunderstood. I agree with what ReformedBaptist says about Calvin, though.

 

[webdog]

Having been a "calvinist" for several years, I have not came accross this idea. Except if you are just simply saying calvinism is equal to determinism. At any rate, I assume you came to this conclusion from some reputable calvinist (i.e. Warfield, Calvin, et.) or one of the creeds or catechisms. Can you share what you read/heard that has given you this impression?

This was my impresssion from personal study of the issue.

 

[webdog]

Do you believe that the unsaved can, by virtue of their own inherent power, seek God?

Define "own inherant power". God has given all men the ability to seek him, so I'm confused by your statement.

 

[ReformedBaptist]

This was my impresssion from personal study of the issue.

I figured so. What/who did you read that gave this impression?

 

[webdog]

I figured so. What/who did you read that gave this impression?

God and the Argument from Mind by J.P Moreland as well as other interviews and debates with atheists and darwinianists.

 

[ReformedBaptist]

God and the Argument from Mind by J.P Moreland as well as other interviews and debates with atheists and darwinianists.

So its their impression of Calvinism. Do you think Calvinists in general have defined their theology as determinism? If so, where?

 

[webdog]

I would think it's a safe assumption to state satan can have his hand in both views. I would venture to say catholicism has satan's fingerprints all over it...and they would fall under the arminian camp.

 

[webdog]

So its their impression of Calvinism. Do you think Calvinists in general have defined their theology as determinism? If so, where?

Correction. It's the impression I formed from hearing the scientific viewpoints of evolution. I gave just one quote from JPM to show where I stand. The evidence is great that the human mind does have what is called "free will". I've never heard him comment on calvinism one way or the other.

The answer to your question is...where haven't they?

 

[ReformedBaptist]

Correction. It's the impression I formed from hearing the scientific viewpoints of evolution. I gave just one quote from JPM to show where I stand. The evidence is great that the human mind does have what is called "free will". I've never heard him comment on calvinism one way or the other.

The answer to your question is...where haven't they?

You could start with the confessions of faith. The Westminster and the 1689 London Baptist Confession both have statements on free-will. It would be interesting to see how you think this concept squares with atheistic evolution.

 

[webdog]

You could start with the confessions of faith. The Westminster and the 1689 London Baptist Confession both have statements on free-will. It would be interesting to see how you think this concept squares with atheistic evolution.

This thread isn't about evolution or the 1689 LBC or Wesminster. It's about a doctrine being "devilish" (whatever that means). At any rate, this debate alone (c / a) shows satan has his hand in both doctrines, else God is the one causing us to believe the way we do.

 

[ReformedBaptist]

This thread isn't about evolution or the 1689 LBC or Wesminster. It's about a doctrine being "devilish" (whatever that means). At any rate, this debate alone (c / a) shows satan has his hand in both doctrines, else God is the one causing us to believe the way we do.

So if controversy surrounds a particular doctrine the devil has his hand in it? Do really believe that? Perhaps you just have overstated because your tired of the controversy. If ole Jacobus would have left well-enough alone, the Synod would not have met and replied. But O well.

And I understand what the thread is about. But I think its apparant my point was proven, however bunny trailish it became.