Tozer- Calvinism tends to be more stable than Arminianism

[Earth Wind and Fire]

as an FYI..... according to Wikipedia (rolls eyes) C&MA Polity is Mixed. Elements of Congregationalist, Presbyterian and non-sacramental Episcopalian polity present

 

[mandym]

Tozer-
"To square the records, however, it should be said that if the Calvinist does not rise as high [phlegmatically], he usually stays up longer. He places more emphasis on the Holy Scriptures which never change, while his opposite number (as the newspapers say) tends to judge his spiritual condition by the state of his feelings, which change constantly. This may be the reason that so many Calvinistic churches remain orthodox for centuries, at least in doctrine, while many churches of the Arminian persuasion often go liberal in one generation."

Do you agree with Tozer?

Do Calvinists seem to be more stable emotionally than "non-cals"?

Their denominations have certainly tended to withstand the onslaught of liberalism and heterodoxy a great deal better than "non-cals".

Emotionalism is often related to the fall of theology.

Pentecostals are BY AND LARGE Arminian (perhaps 99.9999999 percent?) and they tend to be VERY unstable emotionally and less able to defend their doctrines, don't they?

Calvinists tend to be more educated too, don't they?

It would be hard to prove this statistically I suppose, but it has been my experience everywhere I have been.

Presbyterian denominations tend to be VERY demanding educationally of their ministers, for example.

IFB churches and non-reformed Baptist churches do not. And often those folks who are members in those churches are not very educated- at least this has been what I have observed.

I come from the Free Will Baptist movement and it is THOROUGHLY Arminian and it doesn't even HAVE a real seminary in the entire DENOMINATION! (some count Hillsdale but most Free Wills I know would not).

The main Presbyterian church in town, it has been my experience, tends to be the home church of the more educated folks.

Arminianism has seemed to appeal throughout history to the more sensational, emotional masses. It was spread across our land by, what I would consider to be, very shallow emotional tent revivals and camp meetings.

Doesn't it seem to be the case that the more educated one is the less he experiences often reoccurring fits of emotional highs and emotional lows?

Doesn't it seem that the more poor or uneducated or "backwoodsy" a person is the more they tend to be VERY emotional?

Could it be that as our culture dipped a hundred + years ago into low education and heavy emotionalism that THAT is related to the rise of Arminianism in our religious culture?

Could that rise of Arminianism be related to the liberalism that has overtook our culture at the same time?

Tozer, an Arminian, noted that Arminianism tends to liberalism and Calvinism tends to stand many generations before falling into liberalism.

I think they are related.

I think the surge of Calvinism in the SBC and her return to the Fundamentals of the Faith are related as well.

This post is typical of most posts by reformed folks on this board.

 

[Benjamin]

To the OP: Are we not better off discussing theology rather than taking swipes at the intellect and education of those with whom we disagree? It is a tactic, and I think you know it. If we discredit those who hold a view we discredit the view (it is also a rhetorical fallacy called appeal to authority).

No, there are some great minds who count themselves as among the non-Calvinists. I have learned much from men like C.S. Lewis and even Clark Pinnock, to name just two. And I know plenty of knuckle-headed Calvinists.

And that is all beside the point. A view rises or falls on its merit, not on its adherents. Truth is truth because it is true, not because smart people believe it or because dumb ones reject it. This is an offensive post.

Luke, we’ve had this discussion before, but again, you "really" need to learn the difference between arguing and making a philosophical argument which uses valid principles to draw out the truth. I can only assume that either you do not understand what the above quote is explainig to you or don’t really care to get to the truth and just want to continue to argue your position in unproductive ways. This is Phi 101 stuff, basic logical principles; do yourself and us a favor and take a class and develop some critical thinking skills.

 

[Winman]

This was from an article about the workplace, but it seems to fit.

Arrogant behavior can sometimes be a cover up for insecurity. The person overcompensates –acting the part of the smartest person in the room--doesn’t listen to anyone else’s ideas, because her ideas are better, or she feels she is right, or she blames others for anything that goes wrong.

A person who is truly intelligent doesn't need to flaunt it, or ridicule others as less intelligent, it will be obvious.

 

[Bob Alkire]

This post is typical of most posts by reformed folks on this board.

I don't know if I would say most, but it is true by some.

 

[mandym]

I don't know if I would say most, but it is true by some.

I quit posting like I was in the theo areas because they get eat up with it.

 

[Bob Alkire]

I quit posting like I was in the theo areas because they get eat up with it.

So many of us have, but I see a hand full going over board, the same ones, many are very nice just disagree. Jim 1999 has always acted as a Christian and even on Dispensationalism with me, which he does not agree with. And there are many others.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

This post is typical of most posts by reformed folks on this board.

Ahhhhhh......we love you tooo. Such a sweet thing to say.......sooooo, er ahhhh "Typical"

 

[preacher4truth]

Don't you just love when others compare themselves with others, and of course, come out more pious and holy?

Didn't a group in the NT do this also?

- Peace

 

[quantumfaith]

This was from an article about the workplace, but it seems to fit.



A person who is truly intelligent doesn't need to flaunt it, or ridicule others as less intelligent, it will be obvious.

:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:

 

[Old Union Brother]

everyone has give Luke what he wanted. So lets move on!!!

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Yea, now its turning into a feeding frenzy....I think the point has been noted. :1_grouphug:

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

everyone has give Luke what he wanted. So lets move on!!!

Blessings to you my brother in Christ:love2:

 

[preacher4truth]

This was from an article about the workplace, but it seems to fit.

A person who is truly intelligent doesn't need to flaunt it, or ridicule others as less intelligent, it will be obvious.

Which is the reason you tell others numerous times and occasions condescendingly "you probably can't grasp this?" :wavey:

Pot? Kettle?

- Peace

 

[Winman]

Luke can't be the smartest guy in the world, because this fellow is.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vhs6fl3AS-o

 

[JesusFan]

Tozer-
"To square the records, however, it should be said that if the Calvinist does not rise as high [phlegmatically], he usually stays up longer. He places more emphasis on the Holy Scriptures which never change, while his opposite number (as the newspapers say) tends to judge his spiritual condition by the state of his feelings, which change constantly. This may be the reason that so many Calvinistic churches remain orthodox for centuries, at least in doctrine, while many churches of the Arminian persuasion often go liberal in one generation."

Do you agree with Tozer?

Do Calvinists seem to be more stable emotionally than "non-cals"?

Their denominations have certainly tended to withstand the onslaught of liberalism and heterodoxy a great deal better than "non-cals".

Emotionalism is often related to the fall of theology.

Pentecostals are BY AND LARGE Arminian (perhaps 99.9999999 percent?) and they tend to be VERY unstable emotionally and less able to defend their doctrines, don't they?

Calvinists tend to be more educated too, don't they?

It would be hard to prove this statistically I suppose, but it has been my experience everywhere I have been.

Presbyterian denominations tend to be VERY demanding educationally of their ministers, for example.

IFB churches and non-reformed Baptist churches do not. And often those folks who are members in those churches are not very educated- at least this has been what I have observed.

I come from the Free Will Baptist movement and it is THOROUGHLY Arminian and it doesn't even HAVE a real seminary in the entire DENOMINATION! (some count Hillsdale but most Free Wills I know would not).

The main Presbyterian church in town, it has been my experience, tends to be the home church of the more educated folks.

Arminianism has seemed to appeal throughout history to the more sensational, emotional masses. It was spread across our land by, what I would consider to be, very shallow emotional tent revivals and camp meetings.

Doesn't it seem to be the case that the more educated one is the less he experiences often reoccurring fits of emotional highs and emotional lows?

Doesn't it seem that the more poor or uneducated or "backwoodsy" a person is the more they tend to be VERY emotional?

Could it be that as our culture dipped a hundred + years ago into low education and heavy emotionalism that THAT is related to the rise of Arminianism in our religious culture?

Could that rise of Arminianism be related to the liberalism that has overtook our culture at the same time?

Tozer, an Arminian, noted that Arminianism tends to liberalism and Calvinism tends to stand many generations before falling into liberalism.

I think they are related.

I think the surge of Calvinism in the SBC and her return to the Fundamentals of the Faith are related as well.

Think that you MUST differiate to some degree your broad blanket statements though!

Difference between say heretics like a kenneth Copelin/hagin in Charasmatic circles from say DRs Wayne Grudem and Gorden Fee!

Think that Evangelical Arms are well versed in tjheir Theology, even though i think wrong in some major areas

Think ANY believers that has faith in jesus, read/studies/applies the Bible, and is praying and tithing and exercising their Gifts for Lord can and will get used by God!

 

[mandym]

So many of us have, but I see a hand full going over board, the same ones, many are very nice just disagree. Jim 1999 has always acted as a Christian and even on Dispensationalism with me, which he does not agree with. And there are many others.

Yep there are some for sure.

 

[Luke2427]

Doesn't it seem that the more poor or uneducated or "backwoodsy" a person is the more they tend to be VERY emotional?


Now I dont understand this above comment at all... I hope you can explain it so it does NOT sound inflammatory.

I sent this explaination of what I meant to a Brother on BB who kindly approached me with the same concern in the pm.

I hope this helps. I do not intend to backtrack. I mean what I have said. And I can think of no better way to put it. But I can see that it could use clarification. That is the goal of the following. To clarify that I DO mean backwoodsy but that I myself come from the backwoods and many come from the backwoods who are not like the people to whom I am referring. But these people do come LARGELY from the backwoods so I know of no better thing to call them.

Here is my response:

Brother _____________, I always think of you before I make comments like I do concerning things I call "backwoodsy." [or redneck for that matter]

I think of you because I fear you might take it personally and those comments are not meant for you or people like you at all.

You are backwoodsy the same way I am. I was raised in Mississippi. I pastor in the woods in a great little county for hunting and fishing in South Mississippi. I love to run trot lines and pull in monster catfish on the Tombigbee River. I love to hunt and eat squirrel. I love rabbit. I love venison. I ate last night a big plate of peas and cornbread- peas I just picked Monday out of my garden which I planted in which I grew a truck load of peas and butterbeans and squash and cucumbers and tomatoes.

I bet most of these are things you enjoy. This is not what I mean by "backwoodsy". I am referring to a snakehandling type of backwoodsy. A type of rural mentality that you and I do not have (we have rural mentality but I am referring to another type)- the kind that gave rise to Pentecostalism and paved the way for the dominanace of Arminianism in our culture. I am referring to ignorance and arrogance combined that is sometimes found in people who like the same things you and I like and come from the same areas you and I come from. I am contending that these people are the greatest problem the Church faces in our culture.

These types do not tend to come from large cities. Though there is a liberalism that comes from many universities- this TYPE of person that I am referring to is not usually found on campuses of universities. They are found in the woods or in the mountains in the Midwest and Deep South. They are the kinds of people that make a theologically shallow type of Christianity possible and indeed enable it to thrive.

The best way to describe these types to my knowledge is to call them "backwoodsy." There are many folks from the holler like you and I who are thinkers and theologically sound. But it is from this same holler from which MANY, MANY people come who promote a theological ignorance and arrogance and haphazard shallowness that is KILLING Christianity in our nation.

I hope this helps.

God bless!

 

[Luke2427]

Tozer was arminian? I knew him personally for years, and I DIDN't know that. In that era, and even to-day, there is a large group, even amongst baptists, that are neither calvinists or arminian. Someone needs to study theology a little better, without the labels and strict definitions.

Cheers,

Jim

He was no Calvinist, Bro. Jim.

And you either believe man is totally depraved or not. If not you automatically take up the more Arminian view point.

You either believe in unconditional election or conditional election. There really is no middle ground there.

You either believe in Limited Atonement or Unlimited Atonement.
There is no middle ground there.

You either believe grace is irresistable or it is resistable- no middle ground there.

You either believe all saints will persever or you believe some will not- no middle ground there.


Many who do not like to call themselves Arminian are BEST described that way.

 

[Luke2427]

Mandym, I agree and I might add it seems that some folks think that if its not reformed then it is Arminian. I agree with Jim that there are plenty of folks who would not consider themselves in neither camp (self included). I venture to say that no one on this BB would think they could lose their salvation. I've heard it said, "If I had to choose between dancing with a Calvinist or an Arminian, and I could not choose otherwise, I would dance with the Arminian."

Yea, there are plenty of folks who HAVE NO SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY who likie to think of themselves as neither.

That is the VERY REASON why they HAVE NO SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY.

But it does not change the fact that they are, or at least lean heavily to one side or the other on each major point of contention.

Do you believe that God unconditionally elected in eternity past based on nothing that he foresaw any man do who would be saved?

No?

Guess what? You are Arminian on that point. You may dislike the title but it does not change the fact that it is what you are MOST LIKE- at least on that point.

And as far as Perseverence of the Saints is concerned- just because you believe eternal security doesn't mean that you are not an Arminian. Arminius HIMSELF was not settled on that one.

Luke, in light of your comments above, how would you explain the calvinist Westboro Baptist Church? Perhaps an anomaly? (I hope so and think so) I would think that any person who lives in doubt of salvation is going to have problems as you've discussed.

I don't have to explain them. They are the historical exception- not the historical rule. But I will tell you something else- though they are avowed Calvinists- they are the ESSENCE- I mean the very ESSENCE of backwoodsy as I define it above.

The historical rule is one that Tozer eloquently laid out for us- that Arminians tend to be the more unstable bunch emotionally. That Westboro is an unstable bunch is without doubt! That they happen to claim to be Calvinists is an exception. But they are NOT mainstream Calvinists either- they are HYPER Calvinists. These types, at least in our country, tend to have the same problem that the Arminians have to which I am referring in the OP. They are usually very poorly educated. But they are STILL the minority of Calvinists.