The hidden dangers of Calvinism

[Jarthur001]

I read the thread....

No one has yet showed where the danger is. We are now on page 15, so not much time is left. Please post the danger of Calvinism ASAP. Hidden dangers at that.

Thanks..

 

[gb93433]

I read the thread....

No one has yet showed where the danger is. We are now on page 15, so not much time is left. Please post the danger of Calvinism ASAP. Hidden dangers at that.

Thanks..

So many of those who call themselves a Calvinist have never read any or very few of Calvin's works. There seems to be as many different versions of Calvinists as there are people. With them it is like trying to catch a greased pig.

 

[stilllearning]

Hi Jarthur001

You said......

“I read the thread....
No one has yet showed where the danger is. We are now on page 15, so not much time is left. Please post the danger of Calvinism ASAP. Hidden dangers at that.”

I can’t believe you missed them.

Here is one that I have mentioned.
--------------------------------------------------
One danger of Calvinism is, the fact that it is between 75% and 90% correct in it’s Doctrine, yet denies some very important Doctrinal truth.

e.g. “Man’s free will”, etc.

This is a danger because, even though many of my Calvinist brethren are as saved as I am, their allegiance to Reformed theology, forces them to “slide over”, many passages of Scripture. (And this is dangerous.)

If any of us allow ourselves, to “slide over” even one word of Scripture, for the sake of “our affiliations”, we are on dangerous ground.

 

[Jarthur001]

Hi Jarthur001

You said......


I can’t believe you missed them.

Here is one that I have mentioned.
--------------------------------------------------
One danger of Calvinism is, the fact that it is between 75% and 90% correct in it’s Doctrine, yet denies some very important Doctrinal truth.

e.g. “Man’s free will”, etc.

This is a danger because, even though many of my Calvinist brethren are as saved as I am, their allegiance to Reformed theology, forces them to “slide over”, many passages of Scripture. (And this is dangerous.)

If any of us allow ourselves, to “slide over” even one word of Scripture, for the sake of “our affiliations”, we are on dangerous ground.

Hello stilllearning,

I have asked for a danger for I felt you nor others have not givin one yet. So being that I asked and being this is the thread you started, it would seem this would be one of your best shots to nail this down. You said Calvinist slide over verses.

So..lets nail this one down. What do you mean by "slide over".? Do you mean we don't read it? We don't understand it? Do we skip it?

2nd...Name me one verse that a Calvinist slides over.

Thanks...


In Christ.....James

 

[Jarthur001]

So many of those who call themselves a Calvinist have never read any or very few of Calvin's works. There seems to be as many different versions of Calvinists as there are people. With them it is like trying to catch a greased pig.

Are you saying this is what you see as a "hidden danger"?

Its funny, because one of the oldest slams toward Calvinism, is that they are "programmed" and follow John Calvin. But what you say would prove that statement wrong. It seems that you are claiming that Calvinist do have a mind of their own, and maybe they do think are are not programmed as others would say.

As to the greased pig.....the different versions of Calvinist...

That is kinda like a Baptist....is it not? How many different versions of Baptist do we have?

I still see no hidden danger. Please point it out for me.

 

[HankD]

Well, I gave my thoughts as to the "danger" of calvinism.

Not that I am opposed to most of the doctrines thereof.

I guess I would be called a "Christmas" Calvinist - NO "L".
While Christ died for all men, all men will not come.

1 Timothy 4:10 For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.
​

But in my view it is a danger to keep using his name to the degree that it is used with some even quoting from his books with section and line references as if the quotes were from Scripture (yes I know the Institutes are filled with Scripture).

It seems to me to diminish the glory for Christ and is opposed to Scripture ("I am of Apollos... I am of Cephas, etc).

Secondly it is a danger because it causes division and strife among brethren, more even perhaps than the Bible versions issue.


HankD

 

[Jarthur001]

Well, I gave my thoughts as to the "danger" of calvinism.

Not that I am opposed to most of the doctrines thereof.

I guess I would be called a "Christmas" Calvinist - NO "L".
While Christ died for all men, all men will not come.

1 Timothy 4:10 For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.
​

But in my view it is a danger to keep using his name to the degree that it is used with some even quoting from his books with section and line references as if the quotes were from Scripture (yes I know the Institutes are filled with Scripture).

It seems to me to diminish the glory for Christ and is opposed to Scripture ("I am of Apollos... I am of Cephas, etc).

Secondly it is a danger because it causes division and strife among brethren, more even perhaps than the Bible versions issue.


HankD

Lets address these "dangers" one at a time..

1st...you said someting about "L". You didn't say it was a danger, but you said you did not hold to the "L". You go on to quote this verse..

1 Timothy 4:10 For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe

"L" stands for limited. It is my guess you quote this verse to point to these words..."WHO IS THE SAVIOUR OF ALL MEN".

Do you believe all men are saved or do you "limit" this salvation to those who believe as do the Calvinist?

2nd you said...

But in my view it is a danger to keep using his name to the degree that it is used with some even quoting from his books with section and line references as if the quotes were from Scripture (yes I know the Institutes are filled with Scripture)

Could you please post where Calvinist quote John Calvin more then others? If you do a search I think you will find that non-Calvinist quote him more. As already been said...most Calvinist have not read John Calvin.

As to using his name...

If you mean Calvinist...Calvinism... you must be reminded that we didn't take this name, but those that hate John Calvin placed it on us. I would rather call it "doctrines of grace", but when I do, others say..your just hidding from who you are...a Calvinist. Call me what you want. Some call it the gospel, but then others get mad if you call it the gospel.

Are you saying...If we change the "label" to something like..."shoe"...then there would be no more danger?

3rd....

You said...

Secondly it is a danger because it causes division and strife among brethren, more even perhaps than the Bible versions issue

.

This goes both ways...does it not? I mean if you would only believe in "shoe" there would be no strife...now would there? Yet you want to deny "shoe" and cause division among brethren.

 

[Pastor Larry]

So many of those who call themselves a Calvinist have never read any or very few of Calvin's works.

How is that a danger? Isn't one of the complaints about depending too much on Calvin? Now you complain that there are Calvinists who don't depend on Calvin. I don't think you can have it both ways.

There seems to be as many different versions of Calvinists as there are people. With them it is like trying to catch a greased pig.

Not if you know what you are looking for. Calvinists on soteriology are, in the main, in agreement. There are differences on minor points just as there are with every group.

 

[Pastor Larry]

One danger of Calvinism is, the fact that it is between 75% and 90% correct in it’s Doctrine, yet denies some very important Doctrinal truth.

e.g. “Man’s free will”, etc.

I was not aware that Calvinists miss man's free will.

This is a danger because, even though many of my Calvinist brethren are as saved as I am, their allegiance to Reformed theology, forces them to “slide over”, many passages of Scripture. (And this is dangerous.)

If any of us allow ourselves, to “slide over” even one word of Scripture, for the sake of “our affiliations”, we are on dangerous ground.

I agree. So what does "slide over" mean, and which passages do Calvinists "slide over"? I am not aware of one, but perhaps you can be the first to show us.

 

[Pastor Larry]

I guess I would be called a "Christmas" Calvinist - NO "L".
While Christ died for all men, all men will not come.

1 Timothy 4:10 For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.​

Does this verse really deal with the atonement and it sufficiency or efficiency? Isn't this verse teaching that no one has another Savior? That God is the only one. No men are able to be saved except through God.
​

But in my view it is a danger to keep using his name to the degree that it is used with some even quoting from his books with section and line references as if the quotes were from Scripture (yes I know the Institutes are filled with Scripture).

It seems to me to diminish the glory for Christ and is opposed to Scripture ("I am of Apollos... I am of Cephas, etc).

I agree. I would rather just be called Christians, since we believe the historic Christian faith. It is usually just called "the gospel," but some who deny it use the name Christian or biblicist and as a result confuse the issue.

Secondly it is a danger because it causes division and strife among brethren, more even perhaps than the Bible versions issue.

Some CAlvinists cause strife, but for many of us it is thrust upon us by those who do not believe certain verses of the Bible mean what they say. As a result, they create strife and confusion among the brethren, and cause us to defend.


HankD[/quote]

 

[gb93433]

How is that a danger? Isn't one of the complaints about depending too much on Calvin? Now you complain that there are Calvinists who don't depend on Calvin. I don't think you can have it both ways.

Not if you know what you are looking for. Calvinists on soteriology are, in the main, in agreement. There are differences on minor points just as there are with every group.

The main complaint I have is dealing with the ignorance non-Christians are hearing today from the mouths of the ignorant. It is not just from TV and it is not just from "liberal" churches. A lot of it has come from the pulpit. I have never once ever heard a non-Christian ever attack Calvin but rather what Christians today spew out of their mouth from their ignorance of what they think scripture teaches.

In today's serious lack of study and an abundance of ignorance, time would be much better spent on study of the text itself. I am unable to find the name of any theologian in the text itself. I only find that we are to focus on the same Jesus that Paul did. He pointed to Christ so why waste one minute discussing what Calvin or any other man believes but rather what scripture teaches. Scripture is inspired by God not Calvin or his followers or his theology.

Christians might be wise in applying the same technique that counterfeiters do. They study the real thing.

Christians might be wise in applying the same technique that those who are trained to recognize counterfeits. They study the real thing.

So often the "Calvinists" today do not agree with Calvin and yet will name themselves as a follower of him or agreeing with his theology. Some do cherry pick to fit their political camp. Jesus was not in any political or religious camp.

Why do you call yourself a Baptist and name yourself a follower of the theology of a pedobaptist?

My identity is with Christ, not Christ and Calvin or Christ and Calvin's theology. It is Christ, not Christ plus another theologian or theology. It Christ alone not Christ plus something or someone else.

I cannot tell you how many times I have encountered someone talking about what a preacher said and that same person knows little about the Bible or what the passage actually teaches. I have heard non-Christians talk about the ignorance of a preacher. Could that be the reason why people have no faith to share? Could it be that their faith is tied to a man and not the God of the Bible. Too many times people know what a preacher taught and not what scripture teaches. They did not apply Acts 17:11.

 

[Rippon]

My identity is with Christ, not Christ and Calvin.

Christ is a Calvinist.

 

[HankD]

Pastor Larry asks:

Isn't this verse teaching that no one has another Savior? That God is the only one. No men are able to be saved except through God.

This verse is a puzzlement to me because of the word "specially".​

The word here is malista, "especially" or a secondary nuance of "specifically". So I would take a slighly different approach to harmonize it with the doctrine of election.​

He is the Savior of all men (He has that capacity, and His blood would be sufficient propitiation for all men (if all men would come) but all men wont come so He is specifically Savior for those who will come to Him (those given to Him of the Father).​

The rest of your post is also my conviction.​

HankD​

 

[HankD]

Christ is a Calvinist.

Rippon you are just too much!!



HankD

 

[stilllearning]

Hi Jarthur001

You asked........

“So..lets nail this one down. What do you mean by "slide over".? Do you mean we don't read it? We don't understand it? Do we skip it?

2nd...Name me one verse that a Calvinist slides over.”

Obviously, I don’t know every Calvinist; But the Calvinists that I have encountered, are forced to “slide over”, 1Timothy 2:4

“Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.”

--------------------------------------------------
This verse says, that God desires that all men be saved.

Now if you’re a Calvinist, you can’t accept that, because all men don’t get saved.
So therefore, God’s “desire”, is limited by man’s “free will”.
--------------------------------------------------
When I say “slide over”, what I mean, is if anybody comes to the Bible, with their mind set, in a particular theological view(like Calvinism), and encounter a verse of Scripture that contradicts that view, then they are forced, either to “admit they are wrong, and stop being a Calvinist”(I have never seen this), or they are forced to “slide over it”, and make excuses for not accepting it.

 

[gb93433]

Christ is a Calvinist.

I am unable to find anywhere in the Bible where it says that I am to focus on Calvin.

So could you illustrate your point from scripture.

 

[gb93433]

When I say “slide over”, what I mean, is if anybody comes to the Bible, with their mind set, in a particular theological view(like Calvinism), and encounter a verse of Scripture that contradicts that view, then they are forced, either to “admit they are wrong, and stop being a Calvinist”(I have never seen this), or they are forced to “slide over it”, and make excuses for not accepting it.

I have seen it many times in Bible studies I have led among calvinists who have given up evangelism because they bought into the idea that the elect are those who will be saved without any preaching, as well as many hypercalvinists who do not understand that spirituality is not measured as gnosticism would be mesasured but rather a relationship with Jesus Christ. A number of hypercalvinists I have met over the years question whether or not they are of the elect contrary to 1 John 5:11-13.

 

[Jim1999]

Some quote 1 Tim 2:4, but totally ignore Titus 2:11 and then skip over 2 Thes 2:13..."But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, beause God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth."

It does begin with God and ends with God, and man appears to be the chosen.

You don't have to call it Calvinism. That is your choice. IN 63 years of active preaching, I can't ever recall mentioning Calvinism from the pulpit, yet I am a commited Calvinist as were other commited Baptists such has Charles Spurgeon, A. H. Strong and others.

Cheers,

Jim

 

[Jim1999]

Ah, the hidden dangers of Calvinism:





















I thought so. None.

Cheers,

Jim

 

[webdog]

Christ is a Calvinist.

Blasphemy! Christ is a follower of no man! Heresy!