"The New Calvinism" on PBS

[DHK]

Your evaluation is quite problematic. Not every "New Calvinist" is a hyper-Calvinist--I expect you know that to some extent--so this is an intentional overstatement.

New Calvinism itself is not "another gospel." By flagrantly and falsely calling it such, you call into question the salvation of any and all who identify with the New Calvinism, something clearly against the rules that you are supposed to be enforcing.

Of course, if a Calvinist were to categorize some "New Arminianism" as "another gospel" you'd probably be raining down all sorts of "moderator" indignation. How can you presume to moderate us when you seem unable moderate yourself????

Why is it that my "foxes guarding the hen house" comments are almost always proved to be right????

The Archangel

First I never used the word "hyper-calvinist" nor did I imply that all were.
Second, I basically summed up and repeated what the OP said. Listen to the video again. Did I say anything vastly different than what he said?
He was sounding a warning. I do the same.
Third, there are many posters on this board who are so Calvinistic in their beliefs that:
a. they don't believe evangelism is necessary.
b. they believe Calvinism IS the gospel.
c. they believe that those that are non-Cal are deep into heresy.

In the light of the above I have said nothing that even compares to what has been posted by some of the Calvinists on this board.

 

[The Archangel]

First I never used the word "hyper-calvinist" nor did I imply that all were.
Second, I basically summed up and repeated what the OP said. Listen to the video again. Did I say anything vastly different than what he said?
He was sounding a warning. I do the same.
Third, there are many posters on this board who are so Calvinistic in their beliefs that:
a. they don't believe evangelism is necessary.
b. they believe Calvinism IS the gospel.
c. they believe that those that are non-Cal are deep into heresy.

In the light of the above I have said nothing that even compares to what has been posted by some of the Calvinists on this board.

I'm not commenting on the OP at this point, make no mistake.

By calling the new Calvinism "another gospel"--which is arguable--you question the salvation of every Calvinist.

Perhaps, because you're a moderator, you think it's OK to do so or you think you can get away with it. Nevertheless, you've run afoul of the BB rules and now you demonstrate that you do so proudly.

Had a Calvinist moderator said what you said there would be an outcry against him. Again--UNDERSTAND--this is not about your theology or mine; it is about you questioning the salvation of a group of persons on this board because they don't agree with you. That is expressly forbidden by the rules of the BB--rules we mere posters must adhere to or be banned. Yet, you proudly and unrepentantly break said rules.....

I doubt the good "Squire" will do anything about this--probably because you're a moderator. As I've said many times: The foxes are indeed guarding the hen house.

The Archangel

 

[DHK]

I'm not commenting on the OP at this point, make no mistake.

By calling the new Calvinism "another gospel"--which is arguable--you question the salvation of every Calvinist.

Perhaps, because you're a moderator, you think it's OK to do so or you think you can get away with it. Nevertheless, you've run afoul of the BB rules and now you demonstrate that you do so proudly.

Had a Calvinist moderator said what you said there would be an outcry against him. Again--UNDERSTAND--this is not about your theology or mine; it is about you questioning the salvation of a group of persons on this board because they don't agree with you. That is expressly forbidden by the rules of the BB--rules we mere posters must adhere to or be banned. Yet, you proudly and unrepentantly break said rules.....

I doubt the good "Squire" will do anything about this--probably because you're a moderator. As I've said many times: The foxes are indeed guarding the hen house.

The Archangel

You are so wrong!
I have not mentioned any names. Do you personally identify yourself with a movement called "The New Calvinism"? You don't have to answer that.
I responded to the OP, which you infer that as a moderator I should not be allowed to express my opinion. You are wrong.

I said:
There is "The New Calvinism." And they preach 'another gospel,' which Paul had something to say about in Gal.1:6-8.

Then I went on to clarify my statement.
I didn't question anyone's salvation, mention anyone's name, even suggest that anyone here is a "new Calvinist." You are out of order.
This is a new movement with some bad theology and needs to be fairly critiqued.
You have some thin skin, and apparently don't like any one, anybody, or anything that attacks Calvinism. I am sorry for that, but in debate feelings get hurt. Get over it.

 

[The Archangel]

You are so wrong!
I have not mentioned any names. Do you personally identify yourself with a movement called "The New Calvinism"? You don't have to answer that.
I responded to the OP, which you infer that as a moderator I should not be allowed to express my opinion. You are wrong.

I said:
There is "The New Calvinism." And they preach 'another gospel,' which Paul had something to say about in Gal.1:6-8.

Then I went on to clarify my statement.
I didn't question anyone's salvation, mention anyone's name, even suggest that anyone here is a "new Calvinist." You are out of order.
This is a new movement with some bad theology and needs to be fairly critiqued.
You have some thin skin, and apparently don't like any one, anybody, or anything that attacks Calvinism. I am sorry for that, but in debate feelings get hurt. Get over it.

Nope.

By saying the new Calvinism is "another gospel" you--ipso facto--question the salvation of anyone who identifies with it.

Despite the good "Squire's" sticky, it seems questioning the salvation of an entire group of people is OK. I doubt it would be so if I--a Calvinist--questioned the salvation of a subset of non-Calvinists....

The Archangel

 

[Revmitchell]

Nope.

By saying the new Calvinism is "another gospel" you--ipso facto--question the salvation of anyone who identifies with it.

Despite the good "Squire's" sticky, it seems questioning the salvation of an entire group of people is OK. I doubt it would be so if I--a Calvinist--questioned the salvation of a subset of non-Calvinists....

The Archangel

I am not a cal and I agree with you. The rule on this board, however, is not to question the salvation of another poster in the process of discussion. However, ipso facto it may be unless it is a direct accusation against a specific person it will not be addressed by admin.

Then again I was accused by admin of doing it when in fact I did not. So you may just need to catch them in a particular mood.

 

[DHK]

Please don't derail the thread, but address your comments to the OP.

 

[The Archangel]

Please don't derail the thread, but address your comments to the OP.

FUNNY!

Translation: Don't point out how I've broken the rules and have gotten away with it.... Stay on task and don't derail the thread...

What a joke.

The Archangel

 

[Iconoclast]

steaver

With TULIP being so blatant and clearly being expressed in the scriptures, could we conclude the Holy Spirit is failing to teach this truth to the children of God

No.....Jesus declared that the sheep will hear His voice, others who do not, are not His sheep...that is why they do not hear;
26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.

27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:

seeing how most Christians simply don't believe it?

most Christians do believe it.

Or, could it be that those who do not see the obvious are simply still blinded in unbelief and not Christians at all?

that remains a distinct possibility, doesn't it?

 

[Iconoclast]

DHK

There is "The New Calvinism." And they preach 'another gospel,

'

It might be different from your false ideas, but it has not changed since the NT was written. Some day you might even begin to understand it....that day is not today however.:thumbsup:

which Paul had something to say about in Gal.1:6-8.

other than Jesus Himself, Paul wrote most of the teaching we believe....so no, Paul was not speaking of Calvinism as another gospel. You deny much of Pauls teaching so we can see how you fail to grasp the teaching.:wavey:

As the OP stated they are torn between sovereignty and responsibility.
One can easily see that on this board.

no one is torn about this...

Some lean so heavily toward sovereignty that they do not see any personal responsibility toward missions any longer. It is all in the sovereignty of God.

no biblical Calvinist says this...

He has already elect whom he has elected.

Do you think He has not elected who He intends to? How do you understand election since you do not understand what the church has held historically?

There is nothing more we can do. Thus the lack of human responsibility.

it is your man centered theology that confuses you and causes you to accuse Cals of another gospel. AA correctly commented on your abusive posting.

They are confused as to what the image of God is. Since, to them, the image of God preludes the free will of man, then the image of God has already become a false premise to begin with.

there is no free will so you compound your error....

There is so much more. New Calvinism is growing, but not because it is biblical.

If a Calvinistic preacher was in your town and the people heard the truth, they would flee for refuge and you would make excuses for why they left.

 

[Iconoclast]

FUNNY!

Translation: Don't point out how I've broken the rules and have gotten away with it.... Stay on task and don't derail the thread...

What a joke.

The Archangel

:thumbsup::wavey::thumbs::applause:

 

[DHK]

DHK

It might be different from your false ideas, but it has not changed since the NT was written. Some day you might even begin to understand it....that day is not today however.

I suppose if my name were Archangel I would now complain to Squire because of the ad homs and personal attacks, but I won't.
No, I don't hold false ideas, but what is termed "new calvinism" does.
Since it is "new" it did not exist at the time of Christ. At least that much should be obvious to you. Perhaps you should find out what it is first.

other than Jesus Himself, Paul wrote most of the teaching we believe....so no, Paul was not speaking of Calvinism as another gospel. You deny much of Pauls teaching so we can see how you fail to grasp the teaching.

Whether it is Calvinism (which you seem to be referring to), or "new Calvinism" which this thread is about, neither one were around when Paul was alive. TULIP is not taught in the Bible and even in its most basic form did not appear until Augustine came on the stage. That teaching you fail to grasp.

no one is torn about this...

Let me give you an exact quote from the OP, and then you can listen to it and check for yourself:

[FONT=&quot]“Is God sovereign or are we responsible? That is the tension that we are to live in."[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]--This is an obvious flawed teaching. God expects us to live in a world of peace and joy, not in tension. This statement is an admission that Calvinism creates in the mind tension that the believer cannot resolve. The Biblicist has peace of mind. The peace of God dwells in him as he submits to the will of God joyfully and willingly. He chooses to obey and submit in a responsible way to the will of God. This is in contradiction to the predetermination of the Calvinist who is drawn to God's sovereignty and abandons with foolish recklessness his responsibility to God. [/FONT]

no biblical Calvinist says this...

The above was in response to:


Some lean so heavily toward sovereignty that they do not see any personal responsibility toward missions any longer. It is all in the sovereignty of God.
--Do you remember Luke? He made statements like this numerous times. So have others that I have interacted. Remember--I am a missionary. I meet many on this board who have no concern for missions at all. Why? Calvinism has taken its toll on them.

Do you think He has not elected who He intends to? How do you understand election since you do not understand what the church has held historically?

Election is not an excuse.
I understand that we are made in the image of God with a free will, that whosoever will may come, and that election does not prohibit that free will from acting. It is God that wills. And God wills that man chooses; that man exercises his will to either receive him or reject him.
But the foolishness of Calvinism rejects the teaching of the Bible at this point and basically teaches to go and sit in the middle of the forest and wait for God to mystically and mysteriously to regenerate you before you can have the faith to believe. That is foolishness.

it is your man centered theology that confuses you and causes you to accuse Cals of another gospel. AA correctly commented on your abusive posting.

1. My theology centers around the Bible. The Bible is my authority in all matters of faith and doctrine.
2. I never even addressed Calvinists in general. The topic here is "New Calvinism," which apparently you know nothing of. Stop making false accusations.

there is no free will so you compound your error....

Did you freely write the above diatribe or did God coerce you to do it?

If a Calvinistic preacher was in your town and the people heard the truth, they would flee for refuge and you would make excuses for why they left.

If they heard the truth they would flee from Calvinism.

 

[steaver]

Steaver....With TULIP being so blatant and clearly being expressed in the scriptures, could we conclude the Holy Spirit is failing to teach this truth to the children of God

No.....Jesus declared that the sheep will hear His voice, others who do not, are not His sheep...that is why they do not hear;
26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.

27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:

There you have it Rippon, you were saying your Calvinist do not damn non-Cals to hell for their rejecting of Calvinism. (Take notice of your fellow Calvinist Icon's bolding of verse 26 in response to my quoted question)

 

[PreachTony]

Yeah, I know this will probably bring some responses... Please note this is my response to TULIP as it has been presented to me. This is not intended as a scholarly work striking against the estate of John Calvin. :smilewinkgrin:

With TULIP being so blatant and clearly being expressed in the scriptures...

Is it really so blatant and clearly expressed? If it were, why is there still such division over the ideas of TULIP? Why don't more people go along with its ideas?

Total Depravity/Inability - Depending on which term you use, this can actually have two different meanings. Total Depravity means that man is completely wicked and devoid of anything even remotely good. Total Inability means that man, regardless of his condition, cannot approach God in the act of seeking salvation.

Joshua 24:15a states "And if it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord, choose you this day whom ye will serve..." According to Total Inability, man does not have the option to choose to serve the Lord.

Unconditional Election - Calvinism teaches that God chose those He would save, and He chose them unconditionally. If God saves us without condition, then why does the Bible list the condition of faith as a requirement for salvation?

Ephesians 2:8a states "For by grace are ye saved through faith..." Romans 10:14-15 states "How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!" If God unconditionally saves people, then why list the condition of faith, and note that faith is predicated on hearing the preached gospel?

Limited Atonement - According to TULIP, Jesus dies only for the Elect. According to my reading of scripture, Jesus died for all mankind. Of course, here is where we venture into the realm of 'what does it actually mean.' Some Calvinists say that when the Bible says "ALL" it really means "the Elect."

1 John 2:2 states "And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world." Hebrews 2:9 states "But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man." Jesus died in the place of all mankind as payment for their sin debt.

Irresistible Grace - Calvinism here states that when God draws one of the Elect unto salvation they simply cannot resist. The Bible does not bear this out. The Bible shows more than a few instances of God reaching out to His people and them refusing or denying Him. This does not, as some Cals have implied, weaken God. It simply reveals the sinfulness of mankind.

Matthew 23:37 states "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!" This, to me, is the clearest evidence of resistible grace. Jesus Christ lamenting over the unwillingness of those in Jerusalem to turn to Him. Why would He lament that if the only reason they weren't turning to Him was because He hadn't given them the grace to turn to Him?

Perseverance of the Saints - This might be the closest point of TULIP to Biblical truth, from my study. While I don't necessarily believe we are capable of persevering through everything, I believe we are preserved in God.

Ephesisans 4:30 states "And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption." Those who comes to God in salvation are sealed up until the day of redemption. If you study OT law for redeeming and inheritance, especially the couple chapters in Ruth, you can see a beautiful parallel to Christ.

 

[Iconoclast]

steaver

Hello steaver,

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iconoclast View Post
No.....Jesus declared that the sheep will hear His voice, others who do not, are not His sheep...that is why they do not hear;
26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.

27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:

There you have it Rippon, you were saying your Calvinist do not damn non-Cals to hell for their rejecting of Calvinism.

No need to appeal to rippon to back my comments...I am right here:laugh:
Your comment was that The Spirit does not open truth to Gods children...jn 10 says otherwise and explains why some never come to truth.

I know many non cals who are cals now by God's grace. This does NOT MEAN that every professed non cal is a believer, as it does not mean every professed cal is a believer either.

(Take notice of your fellow Calvinist Icon's bolding of verse 26 in response to my quoted question)

do not worry about Icon....steaver.....you should pay more attention to vs 26 and 27.:thumbsup:

This is not the first time you have offered this kind of carnal reasoning scoffing at the truth as if both ideas are equally valid.....they are not.

There you have it Rippon, you were saying your Calvinist do not damn non-Cals to hell for their rejecting of Calvinism.

I do not have any authority to do so.....that belongs to Jesus alone..jn 17:1-3

I do have the right to offer jn 10: 26-27 however.

 

[steaver]

No need to appeal to rippon to back my comments...I am right here:laugh:

No not looking for backup. Rippon said in another thread that Calvinist don't condemn non-Cals to hell for rejecting TULIP. Then you posted a condemnation for those who reject TULIP, just like right on cue :laugh:. I was pointing it out to him.

 

[kyredneck]

From the video (not verbatim):

"If God has already predestinated/chosen those who will believe why even bother to evangelize".

What a shallow attitude.

You do it to bring His little lambs home. You're not preaching the gospel to populate heaven.

 

[steaver]

Your comment was that The Spirit does not open truth to Gods children....

Nice try :laugh:

My comment was why the Spirit does not open TULIP to God's children....at which you posted scripture condemning those who do not believe. Little bait and switch there....

Come on brother.....folks can see what you are doing ya know? :smilewinkgrin:

 

[Iconoclast]

:laughHK

I suppose if my name were Archangel I would now complain to Squire because of the ad homs and personal attacks, but I won't.

AA correctly pointed out your post as written violated board rules. Your
attempt at damage control not withstanding. I do not mind personally an open exchange of ideas.

No, I don't hold false ideas, but what is termed "new calvinism" does.

I believe you hold many false ideas DHK. I find you are very hot, or cold.
On the trinity, scripture, gifts.....on the money

on other areas....way off....

"new Calvinism" has a limited scope. The term speaks of many coming to truth, and yet some of the leaders deviate from traditional teaching in a way that makes older cals not buy into them;

Since it is "new" it did not exist at the time of Christ. At least that much should be obvious to you. Perhaps you should find out what it is first

.

Or...I know what it is and you are trying to deflect from your error:wavey:

Whether it is Calvinism (which you seem to be referring to),

you are correct here....

or "new Calvinism" which this thread is about, neither one were around when Paul was alive.

the teaching is everywhere in the bible...just not the names and labels...this kind of statement is quite foolish in general.....there was no printing press, bibles were not everywhere, of course theology was not nearly as developed.
To read back into history is not valid in this discussion and it does not make your case.

TULIP is not taught in the Bible and even in its most basic form did not appear until Augustine came on the stage. That teaching you fail to grasp.

just answered this

Let me give you an exact quote from the OP, and then you can listen to it and check for yourself:

[FONT=&quot]“Is God sovereign or are we responsible? That is the tension that we are to live in."[/FONT]

there is a proper biblical tension
[FONT=&quot]--

This is an obvious flawed teaching. God expects us to live in a world of peace and joy, not in tension.

This is more error on your part.....I will start a new thread to deal with this as it can be profitable.

This statement is an admission that Calvinism creates in the mind tension that the believer cannot resolve.

Believers can and indeed must resolve it.

The Biblicist has peace of mind. The peace of God dwells in him as he submits to the will of God joyfully and willingly. He chooses to obey and submit in a responsible way to the will of God. This is in contradiction to the predetermination of the Calvinist who is drawn to God's sovereignty and abandons with foolish recklessness his responsibility to God. [/FONT]

This is so flawed it is almost unbelievable, except you have said similar outlandish things

--Do you remember Luke? He made statements like this numerous times. So have others that I have interacted. Remember--I am a missionary. I meet many on this board who have no concern for missions at all. Why? Calvinism has taken its toll on them

.
you would have to show such statements...

Election is not an excuse.

no cal says it is

I understand that we are made in the image of God with a free will

,

You cannot make a biblical case that free will exists...in God or man.

that whosoever will may come, and that election does not prohibit that free will from acting.

again your premise is flawed

It is God that wills. And God wills that man chooses; that man exercises his will to either receive him or reject him.

carnal speculation

But the foolishness of Calvinism rejects the teaching of the Bible at this point

actually....you reject the biblical teaching called Calvinism.

and basically teaches to go and sit in the middle of the forest and wait for God to mystically and mysteriously to regenerate you before you can have the faith to believe. That is foolishness.

I agree your fear of this is foolish as you cannot find any cal who says this

 

[DHK]

From the video (not verbatim):

"If God has already predestinated/chosen those who will believe why even bother to evangelize".

What a shallow attitude.

You do it to bring His little lambs home. You're not preaching the gospel to populate heaven.

Your attitude that is portrayed in this post displays the shallowness of the evangelism among many Calvinists and why there is no zeal, no responsibility to the Great Commission.
Christ died for the world, not simply lambs, which is an inference that they are already saved, and therefore no need to evangelize the lost.
There is no urgency in your post. Sinners are dying and on their way to Hell for all eternity? What are we going to do about it?

What did God want? Even in the OT, the Lord put it so succinctly:
[FONT=&quot]Ezekiel 22:30 And I sought for a man among them, that should make up the hedge, and stand in the gap before me for the land, that I should not destroy it: but I found none.[/FONT]

Is there no one to stand in the gap? Are there still nations without a gospel witness, even some without a Bible in their own language, and we simply sit in our theological armchair and just assume they are not of the elect and therefore not our responsibility. That is so pitiful! It is disregarding the Lord's command everywhere to evangelize all the world. He never, never said to "go and find the elect." That is nonsense.
Nor does the Bible teach that the elect will come to you, or get saved on their own.

 

[Iconoclast]

Nice try :laugh:

My comment was why the Spirit does not open TULIP to God's children....at which you posted scripture condemning those who do not believe. Little bait and switch there....

Come on brother.....folks can see what you are doing ya know? :smilewinkgrin:

let me help you S

Steaver....With TULIP being so blatant and clearly being expressed in the scriptures,

you acknowledge those holding to "tulip" suggest it is indeed the scriptural teaching...here

could we conclude the Holy Spirit is failing to teach this truth to the children of God

now you ask your BIG question:laugh:

If it is truth.....and you actively resist it...where does that leave you steaver?