• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

My thoughts on Calvinism

TisMe

New Member
People accuse Calvinism as being wrong because they say it denies free-will. That is not what Calvinists believe. They deem the choices made in the Bible free-will. There is so much sinning bearing false witness in the flesh of men. Ask any Calvinist, and they will tell you they believe man has a free-will, so what are they really saying then?

What Calvinists are wrong about is they believe they are premade for salvation like robots, which puffs up. They don't think they were premade for hell, but for heaven, because God saved them so they could believe. Their spirit can not sense it is wrong for God to premake people for just hell or heaven. They kill the image of God, because they say in order to come out of total depravity (a false teaching), they can't come to the cross from the image of God in which they are made (this first grace), but that God had to have unconditionally premade them irresistibly and limited, like the Arian nation or natural selection. They truly despise Gen. 1.26,27, the garden choice an Abel's right offering. God foreknew the choice that Abel would make. He chose Abel because He foreknew his choice.

They really do despise that God can predestine by foreknowing our choice. They have no faith to believe God is all-knowing to have this ability. So instead the Calvinist believes the person needs to be pre-programmed long before to be saved - this is what they mean by "chosen," which is not in the same sense as "chosen" by God predestining by foreknowledge (Rom. 8.29) of our choice.

"Chosen by premaking" does not glorify God. God does not want to walk with robots, but man made in His image who receives the cross. Obviously Calvinism is a Pharisaical heresy, because though we are still fallen, we are still made in God's image, so yes, we can come to the cross, not by the will of the flesh but by that part of the will made in God's image which God allows us to receive the redemptive design. The image of God can not be destroyed by the mind of a Calvinist. Never, and I repeat, never say that God saves you first then you can believe. This is a zombism.

If a cult doesn't teach non-OSAS to (control you and passify you), they seem to want to teach Calvinism (pride you up and passify you). In either case, (RCC or Reformers, e.g. puritans, Presbyterians, Lutherans) want to passify you to control you into their system. It is not so pure or presbyter is it? Luther was notoriously confused, for he couldn't let go of the false teaching of total depravity while contradictorily still believing in resistible grace. Those who know anything about Lutheranism know this matter always gets shoved under the rug. You can't have it both ways. Either we can resist God's grace because we are not totally deprave (though fallen), or we can't because we are zombies. Be "not double tongued" (1 Tim. 3.8).

I've debated this topic on a forum before but it did not go very far. Thoughts?

~Alen, TisMe
 

12strings

Active Member
I won't try to defend calvinism here, that's been done elsewhere...But I do want to address a few inaccuracies for any who find this post confusing.

People accuse Calvinism as being wrong because they say it denies free-will. That is not what Calvinists believe. They deem the choices made in the Bible free-will. There is so much sinning bearing false witness in the flesh of men. Ask any Calvinist, and they will tell you they believe man has a free-will, so what are they really saying then?

There are many calvinists who will admit they don't believe in free will...others who do believe in it, defined a certain way. It's a mixed bag.


What Calvinists are wrong about is they believe they are premade for salvation like robots, which puffs up. They don't think they were premade for hell..,

Again, some Cals DO believe some were predestined for destruction...others believe election is only for salvation (double vs. single).

..but for heaven, because God saved them so they could believe.

I don't know of many cals who belive there are saved people who have yet to believe. There are groups who believe that, but they don't like to be called calvinists. Most Cals would say regeneration logically precedes faith, but that the two are instantaneous, and simultaneous in time.


They truly despise Gen. 1.26,27, the garden choice an Abel's right offering.

Only unsaved calvinists despise these verses...The Christian calvinists love them.

They really do despise that God can predestine by foreknowing our choice. They have no faith to believe God is all-knowing to have this ability.

No despising, only believing that scripture teaches something different. Cals have no problem believing that God could have bases election on foreseen faith, but believe scripture teaches otherwise.


Obviously Calvinism is a Pharisaical heresy, because though we are still fallen, we are still made in God's image, so yes, we can come to the cross, not by the will of the flesh but by that part of the will made in God's image which God allows us to receive the redemptive design.

Pharisaicism generally refers to those who believe keeping the law will earn you a right standing with God, or that keeping very strict rules will make you closer to God or more holy than those who do not keep them. It has nothing to do with Cal/non Cal debates, so I'm not sure what you mean here. The italicized part doesn't really help clarify why you call calvinism a Pharisaical heresy.

Never, and I repeat, never say that God saves you first then you can believe.

The Cals I know don't say that, so we will gladly agree to continue not saying it.

If a cult doesn't teach non-OSAS to (control you and passify you), they seem to want to teach Calvinism (pride you up and passify you). In either case, (RCC or Reformers, e.g. puritans, Presbyterians, Lutherans) want to passify you to control you into their system.

1. There are many true churches (non-cults) who deny OSAS, and many others that hold to calvinistic docrtine...an many in betweeen. None of those make you a cult, based on the accepted definition of the word.

2. Power struggles can happen in any belief system, and power-hungry leaders can use any belief system to try to control and influence people...the problem is man's sinful desires and actions.

It is not so pure or presbyter is it?

I don't know what this means.

I've debated this topic on a forum before but it did not go very far.

Yeah, these calvinism debates never seem to get that much attention... ;-)
 

preacher4truth

Active Member
People accuse Calvinism as being wrong because they say it denies free-will. That is not what Calvinists believe. They deem the choices made in the Bible free-will. There is so much sinning bearing false witness in the flesh of men. Ask any Calvinist, and they will tell you they believe man has a free-will, so what are they really saying then?

What Calvinists are wrong about is they believe they are premade for salvation like robots, which puffs up. They don't think they were premade for hell, but for heaven, because God saved them so they could believe. Their spirit can not sense it is wrong for God to premake people for just hell or heaven. They kill the image of God, because they say in order to come out of total depravity (a false teaching), they can't come to the cross from the image of God in which they are made (this first grace), but that God had to have unconditionally premade them irresistibly and limited, like the Arian nation or natural selection. They truly despise Gen. 1.26,27, the garden choice an Abel's right offering. God foreknew the choice that Abel would make. He chose Abel because He foreknew his choice.

They really do despise that God can predestine by foreknowing our choice. They have no faith to believe God is all-knowing to have this ability. So instead the Calvinist believes the person needs to be pre-programmed long before to be saved - this is what they mean by "chosen," which is not in the same sense as "chosen" by God predestining by foreknowledge (Rom. 8.29) of our choice.

"Chosen by premaking" does not glorify God. God does not want to walk with robots, but man made in His image who receives the cross. Obviously Calvinism is a Pharisaical heresy, because though we are still fallen, we are still made in God's image, so yes, we can come to the cross, not by the will of the flesh but by that part of the will made in God's image which God allows us to receive the redemptive design. The image of God can not be destroyed by the mind of a Calvinist. Never, and I repeat, never say that God saves you first then you can believe. This is a zombism.

If a cult doesn't teach non-OSAS to (control you and passify you), they seem to want to teach Calvinism (pride you up and passify you). In either case, (RCC or Reformers, e.g. puritans, Presbyterians, Lutherans) want to passify you to control you into their system. It is not so pure or presbyter is it? Luther was notoriously confused, for he couldn't let go of the false teaching of total depravity while contradictorily still believing in resistible grace. Those who know anything about Lutheranism know this matter always gets shoved under the rug. You can't have it both ways. Either we can resist God's grace because we are not totally deprave (though fallen), or we can't because we are zombies. Be "not double tongued" (1 Tim. 3.8).

I've debated this topic on a forum before but it did not go very far. Thoughts?

~Alen, TisMe

So you've come up with your beliefs on Calvinism arbitrarily.
 

TisMe

New Member
So you've come up with your beliefs on Calvinism arbitrarily.

Yes, I have a ways to go. I am not saying I am right but I base my opinion on what I have learned thus far. I understand I may be wrong in some places ( maybe a lot :tongue3: ) but I will continue to read and learn. Feel free to tell me what you disagree with and what I should pay more attention to. I don't claim to know it all. :)
 

preacher4truth

Active Member
Yes, I have a ways to go. I am not saying I am right but I base my opinion on what I have learned thus far. I understand I may be wrong in some places ( maybe a lot :tongue3: ) but I will continue to read and learn. Feel free to tell me what you disagree with and what I should pay more attention to. I don't claim to know it all. :)

What have you read?

Thus far all of your beliefs on Calvinism are purely subjective.

Do you conclude most or all of your beliefs on your own subjectivity? If not, why have you done so on this issue?
 

TisMe

New Member
What have you read?

Thus far all of your beliefs on Calvinism are purely subjective.

Do you conclude most or all of your beliefs on your own subjectivity? If not, why have you done so on this issue?
Subjectivity is Subjective in it's self. What it is truth? Any belief, idea, or claim anyone has on any matter is Subjective and can be open for debate.

I do agree with you, my tone and way I wrote this could have been done less arrogantly and professional. My apologies
 

preacher4truth

Active Member
Subjectivity is Subjective in it's self. What it is truth? Any belief, idea, or claim anyone has on any matter is Subjective and can be open for debate.

I do agree with you, my tone and way I wrote this could have been done less arrogantly and professional. My apologies

I didn't see you as being arrogant and never made such a claim.

But I ask again, what have you read? Answer this please with evidence.

Do you conclude most of your beliefs on your own subjectivity? If not, why have you done so on this issue?

You've made conclusions based upon you thus far. Other sources or are you shooting from the hip?
 

quantumfaith

Active Member
I won't try to defend calvinism here, that's been done elsewhere...But I do want to address a few inaccuracies for any who find this post confusing.

There are many calvinists who will admit they don't believe in free will...others who do believe in it, defined a certain way. It's a mixed bag.




Again, some Cals DO believe some were predestined for destruction...others believe election is only for salvation (double vs. single).



I don't know of many cals who belive there are saved people who have yet to believe. There are groups who believe that, but they don't like to be called calvinists. Most Cals would say regeneration logically precedes faith, but that the two are instantaneous, and simultaneous in time.




Only unsaved calvinists despise these verses...The Christian calvinists love them.



No despising, only believing that scripture teaches something different. Cals have no problem believing that God could have bases election on foreseen faith, but believe scripture teaches otherwise.


Obviously Calvinism is a Pharisaical heresy, because though we are still fallen, we are still made in God's image, so yes, we can come to the cross, not by the will of the flesh but by that part of the will made in God's image which God allows us to receive the redemptive design.

Pharisaicism generally refers to those who believe keeping the law will earn you a right standing with God, or that keeping very strict rules will make you closer to God or more holy than those who do not keep them. It has nothing to do with Cal/non Cal debates, so I'm not sure what you mean here. The italicized part doesn't really help clarify why you call calvinism a Pharisaical heresy.



The Cals I know don't say that, so we will gladly agree to continue not saying it.



1. There are many true churches (non-cults) who deny OSAS, and many others that hold to calvinistic docrtine...an many in betweeen. None of those make you a cult, based on the accepted definition of the word.

2. Power struggles can happen in any belief system, and power-hungry leaders can use any belief system to try to control and influence people...the problem is man's sinful desires and actions.



I don't know what this means.



Yeah, these calvinism debates never seem to get that much attention... ;-)

12, as always you respond with class. :)
 

quantumfaith

Active Member
Yes, I have a ways to go. I am not saying I am right but I base my opinion on what I have learned thus far. I understand I may be wrong in some places ( maybe a lot :tongue3: ) but I will continue to read and learn. Feel free to tell me what you disagree with and what I should pay more attention to. I don't claim to know it all. :)

Tisme,

Whatever you do, maintain this spirit and attitude. You will over time come to more certain conclusions on SOME things, others will always offer you a tension, a tension to wrestle with and perhaps never resolve. Blessings to you.

BTW, I am not a calvinist, but I do think you have a bit more to learn about them and many various and nuanced positions that they hold. Read and learn from a variety of sources, all the while being validated by your own personal reading of the scriptures.
 

TisMe

New Member
I didn't see you as being arrogant and never made such a claim.

But I ask again, what have you read? Answer this please with evidence.

Do you conclude most of your beliefs on your own subjectivity? If not, why have you done so on this issue?

You've made conclusions based upon you thus far. Other sources or are you shooting from the hip?

I don't understand how I can produce evidence I have or have not read something?

These thought's are based of old thoughts, I posted on another forums, and wanted to revise them and posted it so that I can gain more knowledge through others reply's.

None of your questions are dealing with the OP, If there is a particular point I wrote or something I said, feel free to address it.

If you have personal question's about me and what books I've read, ect, feel free to use the private message function.
 

TisMe

New Member
Tisme,

Whatever you do, maintain this spirit and attitude. You will over time come to more certain conclusions on SOME things, others will always offer you a tension, a tension to wrestle with and perhaps never resolve. Blessings to you.

BTW, I am not a calvinist, but I do think you have a bit more to learn about them and many various and nuanced positions that they hold. Read and learn from a variety of sources, all the while being validated by your own personal reading of the scriptures.

Tyvm, Quantumfaith

I've had a tough life and been through a lot and was turning into a grumpy old man like my Father and one day it dawned on me and I've chosen to try my best to treat everyone with love and respect, regardless, and be humble.
 

preacher4truth

Active Member
I don't understand how I can produce evidence I have or have not read something?

You don't understand how you can provide evidence for something you've read that caused you to arrive at your conclusions? The remainder of your questions is quite odd.

These thought's are based of old thoughts, I posted on another forums, and wanted to revise them and posted it so that I can gain more knowledge through others reply's.

This is what I am getting at. All you have offered is your thoughts thus your entire argument is arbitrary.

None of your questions are dealing with the OP, If there is a particular point I wrote or something I said, feel free to address it.

If you have personal question's about me and what books I've read, ect, feel free to use the private message function.

I'm simply asking what books you've used to come to the conclusions in your OP. My posts are not contrary to the OP but are asking for validation and are in fact dealing with it.

You can answer what books you've read here in this thread that have caused you to arrive at your conclusions. That is what I am asking. To reiterate, all you've offered so far in your argument and OP is totally subjective.
 

TisMe

New Member
BTW, I appreciate your spirit in all this as well. I'm just searching a little deeper than emotion.

To best honest, I have a hard time (sometimes) understanding people's desired question, for lack of better wording, what there getting at, because of my upbringing, English was not my first language so bare with me.

I will list the books and other resources that have directed me to these subjective idea's.
 

TisMe

New Member
I will list the books and other resources that have directed me to these subjective idea's.

The bible, Calvin, Various forums ( I know, I know, ), Logical Arguments to Disprove the Doctrines of Grace, The Five Points of Calvinism: Defined, Defended, and Documented, Lectures on Calvinism, The Stone Lectures of 1898, Spurgeon Vs Hyper Calvinism (Paperback),The Battle For Gospel Preaching, Institutes of the Christian Religion (2 Volume Set), Chosen by God by R. C. Sproul, The Five Dilemmas of Calvinism,

These are just a few on the shelf next to me in my study room.

If there is a certain book I should read or outlook I should take, I would be happy to take advise.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

preacher4truth

Active Member
The bible, Calvin, Various forums ( I know, I know, ), Logical Arguments to Disprove the Doctrines of Grace, The Five Points of Calvinism: Defined, Defended, and Documented, Lectures on Calvinism, The Stone Lectures of 1898, Spurgeon Vs Hyper Calvinism (Paperback),The Battle For Gospel Preaching, Institutes of the Christian Religion (2 Volume Set), Chosen by God by R. C. Sproul, The Five Dilemmas of Calvinism,

These are just a few on the shelf next to me in my study room.

If there is a certain book I should read or outlook I should take, I would be happy to take advise.

OK. You've looked up some titles. Now tell us what exactly from these resources brought you to your conclusions.

To be honest, nothing in your OP reflected a learning from other sources but mirrored total subjectivity.

I will excuse your English in your explanations -- that is not a problem. I haven't up to this point noted a problem with your English and hope this is not a 'sympathy card' being played on your account.
 

TisMe

New Member
You can answer what books you've read here in this thread that have caused you to arrive at your conclusions. That is what I am asking.


The bible, Calvin, Various forums ( I know, I know, ), Logical Arguments to Disprove the Doctrines of Grace, The Five Points of Calvinism: Defined, Defended, and Documented, Lectures on Calvinism, The Stone Lectures of 1898, Spurgeon Vs Hyper Calvinism (Paperback),The Battle For Gospel Preaching, Institutes of the Christian Religion (2 Volume Set), Chosen by God by R. C. Sproul, The Five Dilemmas of Calvinism




OK. You've looked up some titles.

To be honest, nothing in your OP reflected a learning from other sources but mirrored total subjectivity.


Then why ask for a list of sources and books, if you already made your mind up that I used none?

I will excuse your English in your explanations -- that is not a problem. I haven't up to this point noted a problem with your English and hope this is not a 'sympathy card' being played on your account.

Good, I am glad because it has been a problem for many for a long time. Let me know what part of the OP, you disagree with or have questions about.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

TisMe

New Member
Tisme,

Whatever you do, maintain this spirit and attitude. You will over time come to more certain conclusions on SOME things, others will always offer you a tension, a tension to wrestle with and perhaps never resolve. Blessings to you.

I am finding out quickly in my short time @ the BB, what landmines not to step on. :thumbs:
 

quantumfaith

Active Member
The bible, Calvin, Various forums ( I know, I know, ), Logical Arguments to Disprove the Doctrines of Grace, The Five Points of Calvinism: Defined, Defended, and Documented, Lectures on Calvinism, The Stone Lectures of 1898, Spurgeon Vs Hyper Calvinism (Paperback),The Battle For Gospel Preaching, Institutes of the Christian Religion (2 Volume Set), Chosen by God by R. C. Sproul, The Five Dilemmas of Calvinism









Then why ask for a list of sources and books, if you already made your mind up that I used none?



Good, I am glad because it has been a problem for many for a long time. Let me know what part of the OP, you disagree with or have questions about.

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:
 

quantumfaith

Active Member
I am finding out quickly in my short time @ the BB, what landmines not to step on. :thumbs:

Just be yourself, learn and you will learn the voices that are worth listening to, there are good and solid voices....on both sides of the aisle. There are also some who are just noise.
 
Top