Should Christians call themselves Calvinists?

[webdog]

Look...

I would never, nor would ANY Baptist theologian say and want to that place Scripture on the say level as Systematic theology. This means every book written about the Bible is the same as the Bible. This is pretty much what the RCC teaches.

Revelation must be seen as the highest authority. I'm not sure you understand the danger.

Scripture is the BASE from which we GET Systematic theology but it is NOT systematic theology. It can never be changed.

Systematic theology changes based in Scripture. One is to NEVER place the two on the same level. All has ALWAYS been the protestant view.

I have nothing more to say on the subject. Its not even up for debate.

The above bolded is a great leap in logic. The Bible is immutable truth...every other book isn't. You are right, it is not up for debate as the Bible is THE source for any and all systematic theology, not the work of men. I'm surprised you disagree with this.

 

[pinoybaptist]

I don't deny election. It's biblical. I deny the Calvinist interpretation of it.

Well, what is the Calvinist interpretation, and how do they differ from what the Bible says, and how would you interpret it ?

I just imagine (when I was unsaved) what I would have thought if someone had told me that God may not have chosen me for salvation and if He didn't,

but you see, no offense, you and some here are trying to create a scenario that may not even be how Calvinists work. In the first place, why would someone, Calvinist, or Arminian, or Primitive Baptist, tell such a thing to an INQUIRING sinner who may be under the conviction of the Holy
Spirit ? That is such a stupid thing to do. Only Christ has the authority AND knowledge to tell anyone one is not His own for the simple reason that He is the author of the book of Life.

then there was no hope for me. I would have said well then I guess God will save me or He won't so ppphhhhttt....I'll just go do what I want and forget about it.

Well, Calvinism or Doctrine of Grace or Arminianism aside, what would you think of a "prospect" who thinks that he/she can live as he/she pleases because anyway he/she is eternally secure in Christ after having "accepted" Him as personal Savior ? Would you think that this soul one has just "won" to Christ really is someone who is under the "wooing" of the Spirit ?

That's some bad witnessing if you ask me.

It sure is.

 

[Jon-Marc]

Since I'm not a Calvinist, I wouldn't call myself one. I don't believe that God's atonement is limited. The only limitation to atonement is to those who respond to the Holy Spirit's convicting power. Otherwise, God's offer of forgiveness and salvation is to EVERYONE. Unfortunately, not everyone will respond to His calling.

 

[quantumfaith]

Since I'm not a Calvinist, I wouldn't call myself one. I don't believe that God's atonement is limited. The only limitation to atonement is to those who respond to the Holy Spirit's convicting power. Otherwise, God's offer of forgiveness and salvation is to EVERYONE. Unfortunately, not everyone will respond to His calling.

Excellent!!!:thumbs:

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Since I'm not a Calvinist, I wouldn't call myself one. I don't believe that God's atonement is limited. The only limitation to atonement is to those who respond to the Holy Spirit's convicting power. Otherwise, God's offer of forgiveness and salvation is to EVERYONE. Unfortunately, not everyone will respond to His calling.

I dont call myself Calvinist either.....its Reformed &/or follower of Pauline Theology. I do not reject the doctrines of Grace but embrace them. Thats how I study, thru that lens. Ive never criticized how anyone else believes....even some I view as in great error. Rather I just speak to them & let them know why I believe the way I do....no fighting is required. not now & not ever.

 

[quantumfaith]

"Reformed theology hovers over the abyss of blasphemy."

 

[The Archangel]

"Reformed theology hovers over the abyss of blasphemy."

This is incendiary, offensive, and uncalled for. Not to mention it seeks to place a stumbling block of offense directly on the heads of people you are supposed to call brothers and sisters in Christ.

Rethink your comment of infamy.

The Archangel

 

[quantumfaith]

This is incendiary, offensive, and uncalled for. Not to mention it seeks to place a stumbling block of offense directly on the heads of people you are supposed to call brothers and sisters in Christ.

Rethink your comment of infamy.

The Archangel

It is a quote by a REFORMED theologian. No I wont retract it, its purpose, was to cause some to possibly think, what does this mean......

It is a quote by John Gerstner, warning his fellow Calvinists about some of the logical "issues" with their system. Much like, many great mathematicians ignored warnings to spend inordinate amounts of time in pursuit of Fermats Last Theorem.

 

[quantumfaith]

This is incendiary, offensive, and uncalled for. Not to mention it seeks to place a stumbling block of offense directly on the heads of people you are supposed to call brothers and sisters in Christ.

Rethink your comment of infamy.

The Archangel

Oh and BTW Archangle. "You talkin to me"? :thumbs:

 

[Winman]

I don't know why Arminians and semi-Arminians follow man made systems and cannot see that Calvinism is biblical and all other systems are self contradictory and unscriptural.

Well Luke, isn't your comment ironic? Those of us who are non-Cals see your system as non-scriptural and man made, based primarily on the teachings of Augustine and Calvin.

It isn't like myself and others haven't presented many dozens of scriptures that clearly contradict your doctrine. I have presented so much scripture that contradicts your doctrine that is amazing to me that you can't see it. You have to ignore a lot of scripture to hold to Calvinism, you really do.

On the contrary, more times than not Calvinists offer the writings of men to support their view and not scripture.

 

[Gabriel Elijah]

"Reformed theology hovers over the abyss of blasphemy."

“blasphemy” or doctrine that you yourself disagree with? What exactly is blasphemous about it? Admittedly many reformers endorsed paedobaptism (child/infant baptism), which I disagree with wholeheartedly, but I will admit Zwingli’s idea of “baptismus sit Christianorum circumcisio” (baptism is the circumcision of the Christian) at least made me think, & made me research the Scripture to support why I endorse believers baptism only. But even though I disagree with him I wouldn’t brand him blasphemous for this inaccurate doctrine. What areas do you find so offensive?

 

[quantumfaith]

The Bible is NOT systematic theology. It is revelation.

and history, and poetry and song and story....

 

[quantumfaith]

“blasphemy” or doctrine that you yourself disagree with? What exactly is blasphemous about it? Admittedly many reformers endorsed paedobaptism (child/infant baptism), which I disagree with wholeheartedly, but I will admit Zwingli’s idea of “baptismus sit Christianorum circumcisio” (baptism is the circumcision of the Christian) at least made me think, & made me research the Scripture to support why I endorse believers baptism only. But even though I disagree with him I wouldn’t brand him blasphemous for this inaccurate doctrine. What areas do you find so offensive?

No, No, you are getting your knickers in a knot to quickly. "I" did not label anything as blasphemous> I shared a quote from a reformer about his own theology in effort to cause those here to think.......what could this mean, rather than just "flying off the handle".

 

[Gabriel Elijah]

No, No, you are getting your knickers in a knot to quickly. "I" did not label anything as blasphemous> I shared a quote from a reformer about his own theology in effort to cause those here to think.......what could this mean, rather than just "flying off the handle".

Lol- sorry wasn’t tryin to sound like I was getting my “knickers in a knot”. :laugh:Just curious about which areas you had the problem with.

 

[Gabriel Elijah]

ps quantumfaithn--you an Alabama or Auburn fan--my home state brother?

 

[Luke2427]

Since I'm not a Calvinist, I wouldn't call myself one. I don't believe that God's atonement is limited. The only limitation to atonement is to those who respond to the Holy Spirit's convicting power. Otherwise, God's offer of forgiveness and salvation is to EVERYONE. Unfortunately, not everyone will respond to His calling.

We believe the offer is to everyone. Jesus never said- "Come unto me- except you folks in the back!"

The problem is that people WILL NOT come to the light lest their deeds should be reproved. Men love darkness rather than light.

God has to replace their heart of stone with one that CAN receive the things of the Spirit of God. Then they will come.

The offer is to everyone- but the only ones who accept it are the ones who God changes their heart first.

 

[The Archangel]

Oh and BTW Archangle. "You talkin to me"? :thumbs:

As a matter of fact, I am talking to you, and I am not joking. First off, my moniker is spelled The A-R-C-H-A-N-G-E-L; my moniker has nothing to do with geometry.

Secondly, your comment was unqualified coming in the thread after Earth, Wind & Fire's comments:

I dont call myself Calvinist either.....its Reformed &/or follower of Pauline Theology. I do not reject the doctrines of Grace but embrace them. Thats how I study, thru that lens. Ive never criticized how anyone else believes....even some I view as in great error. Rather I just speak to them & let them know why I believe the way I do....no fighting is required. not now & not ever.

Therefore, to post those comments, unqualified as they were, is to call him a blasphemer for holding to Reformed Theology.

It is a quote by a REFORMED theologian. No I wont retract it, its purpose, was to cause some to possibly think, what does this mean......

It is a quote by John Gerstner, warning his fellow Calvinists about some of the logical "issues" with their system. Much like, many great mathematicians ignored warnings to spend inordinate amounts of time in pursuit of Fermats Last Theorem.

I'm well aware that a Reformed Theologian named John Gerstner wrote that quote; I'm well aware that persons like Ken Keathley and others use this quote to argue for Molinism.

I'm all for thinking about election, how reprobation works, how the decrees of God are involved (infra or supra lapsarianism), etc. Number theory is infinitely different from Reformed theology and though Fermat's Theorem is supposedly unsolvable, it does not invalidate the whole science of mathematics. In the same way, even as Calvinism has certain tensions which are weighty and difficult, it does not invalidate the whole of Reformed theology.

So, again, you comments were incendiary and if you wanted to "make us think" you should have asked us to ponder the Gerstner's quote rather than quote it after a post affirming Reformed theology without any context.

A word to the wise should be sufficient.

The Archangel

 

[quantumfaith]

ps quantumfaithn--you an Alabama or Auburn fan--my home state brother?

I am an Auburn (BS Math) and Troy (MS Math) graduate, but I am a Florida Gator Fan.

This is probably one of your first encounters with me. I am the resident "not sure of what he is", but confidently not "reformed" (at the moment anyway). I am "rarely" snippy around here, and Never hateful. But occasionally, not always intentionally, I can really seem to "stir the pot".

Mercy, Peace and Love in Abundance. Can we say Merry Christmas here?

 

[quantumfaith]

As a matter of fact, I am talking to you, and I am not joking. First off, my moniker is spelled The A-R-C-H-A-N-G-E-L; my moniker has nothing to do with geometry.

Secondly, your comment was unqualified coming in the thread after Earth, Wind & Fire's comments:

​

Therefore, to post those comments, unqualified as they were, is to call him a blasphemer for holding to Reformed Theology.



I'm well aware that a Reformed Theologian named John Gerstner wrote that quote; I'm well aware that persons like Ken Keathley and others use this quote to argue for Molinism.

I'm all for thinking about election, how reprobation works, how the decrees of God are involved (infra or supra lapsarianism), etc. Number theory is infinitely different from Reformed theology and though Fermat's Theorem is supposedly unsolvable, it does not invalidate the whole science of mathematics. In the same way, even as Calvinism has certain tensions which are weighty and difficult, it does not invalidate the whole of Reformed theology.

So, again, you comments were incendiary and if you wanted to "make us think" you should have asked us to ponder the Gerstner's quote rather than quote it after a post affirming Reformed theology without any context.

A word to the wise should be sufficient.

The Archangel

I respect your comments, but accept them not. It was intended to "get attention". And to make one think. BTW Fermats Last Theorem has been proven, in 1990 by Dr. Andrew Wiles. And yes, thinking about theology and the logic of systems is quite often analagous to higher mathematics. QED

 

[pinoybaptist]

you guys are making this worthless hillbilly's donkey's head spin...