What is calvinism?

[Rippon]

I beg your pardon Allan ? The Calvinists here were non-Cals initially . One isn't born a Calvinist ! Many non-Cals do think that God has to answer to a principle , law or whatever which is higher than the Lord Himself . AND , many here do indeed think that God owes it to everyone to give them a fair break . They want to believe in an equal-opportunity God . They deride the scriptural doctine of election -- twisting and turning it this way and that in order that their philosophical bent is appeased . They call the Calvinist's God a cruel monster even . J.D. wasn't making anything up out of whole cloth . You just need to read more threads to see the obvious .

 

[whatever]

JD -

Being that I have never hear anything of the type espoused by Non-Cal pastors I personally know or sat under much less College and Seminary stated in ANY mannerism your statements. . . .

Hi Allan,

Is it really your contention that, because you have never heard it, then no one is saying it? Surely not. The kind of statements that JD referenced have been made many times on this board. Not all non-Calvinists say those things, but many certainly do. JD did not make it up.

 

[Allan]

Whatever - Point taken.

Alright then, let me back up.

JD and any other Calvinists

If you are refering to a minority of Non-Cals then PLEASE SPECIFY THIS. To accert MANY Non-Cals gives the distinct impression this is the Norm for Non-Cals and it is not!


BUT - whatever,
I have been on BB (and I read most all the posts- I'm a lurker that way) for over (that I can recollect) 6 months and have not read ANYONE stating those ridulous notions. I would love to know who they are, because I personally would love to speak with them.

 

[Allan]

I beg your pardon Allan ? The Calvinists here were non-Cals initially . One isn't born a Calvinist ! Many non-Cals do think that God has to answer to a principle , law or whatever which is higher than the Lord Himself . AND , many here do indeed think that God owes it to everyone to give them a fair break . They want to believe in an equal-opportunity God . They deride the scriptural doctine of election -- twisting and turning it this way and that in order that their philosophical bent is appeased . They call the Calvinist's God a cruel monster even . J.D. wasn't making anything up out of whole cloth . You just need to read more threads to see the obvious .

Again, false statements from Rippon taken to extremes to show an inaccurate accertion concerning his misunderstanding of the Non-Cal view.

 

[Rippon]

My statements may lead to an inaccurate accertion , but an accurate assertion . :smilewinkgrin: But perhaps my statements may lead to a fare deducktion . I'm getting the hang of your vocabulary .

 

[whatever]

. . . BUT - whatever,
I have been on BB (and I read most all the posts- I'm a lurker that way) for over (that I can recollect) 6 months and have not read ANYONE stating those ridulous notions. I would love

to know who they are, because I personally would love to speak with them.

Check the first paragraph of this article, from a fairly regular poster here, and compare it to what JD said: http://www.setterfield.org/calvinism.htm

Let me add this - I have no animosity toward this particular poster, nor any other. I think she (and many others) grossly misunderstand what most Calvinists actually believe. For example, she boils Calvinism down to this - "to blame people and judge them for something they were ultimately helpless to influence or do anything about". To put it kindly, this is a misrepresentation. But I do the same kind of thing to others, so how can I rightly hold a grudge for that?

EDIT - Sorry for mangling your quote - I don't know how it got split, but every time I try to fix it, it gets split somewhere else.

 

[Brother Bob]

Yes , the Light ( Jesus , the Christ ) lightens every class of people -- all kinds of folks who are the elect . The Lord doesn't enlighten those who have never heard . And He doesn't enlighten those who have heard whom He withholds His saving power .

It is indeed true that in the natural realm people love darkness -- they not only walk in darkness -- they ARE darkness .

It doesn't say "every class" but I understand that you have to change the meaning to fit your theology as you have to change other words also, such as all, whole world, any man, etc.

 

[Rippon]

The light that lighteth every man . The word "man" isn't in the original Bob . That was an unwarranted insertion . Do you believe that God has given everyone a saving knowlege of Himself ? Is that what you have inferred from the text ? Has the Lord given divine illumination to every individual -- past , present and future ?

 

[Allan]

Check the first paragraph of this article, from a fairly regular poster here, and compare it to what JD said: http://www.setterfield.org/calvinism.htm

Let me add this - I have no animosity toward this particular poster, nor any other. I think she (and many others) grossly misunderstand what most Calvinists actually believe. For example, she boils Calvinism down to this - "to blame people and judge them for something they were ultimately helpless to influence or do anything about". To put it kindly, this is a misrepresentation. But I do the same kind of thing to others, so how can I rightly hold a grudge for that?

EDIT - Sorry for mangling your quote - I don't know how it got split, but every time I try to fix it, it gets split somewhere else.

Ok, but note also that she states (though thank you for bringing it to my attention. I will ask her about how she feels now)

I remember the first time I heard the idea that God chose who would be saved, regardless of anything a man might want or do, long before the creation of the world. I was either a teenager or a young adult in my twenties. My reaction, as a Christian, was something along the lines of "That is really dumb. Who could love a God like that? Who could believe that?"

This is not something she continues to say as far as I know. She doesn't agree with Calvinism but that does not equate to her still being under that same mind set as to her first encounter with it.

However just to elaborate a little, What was your reaction the FIRST time you heard about Calvinism? It is usually the same as her first reaction.

 

[Rippon]

Allan , don't back away from your earlier protestations that J.D. and I were making things up ( lying ) . If you have changed your mind about that , please let us know .

 

[Brother Bob]

Tts 2:11¶For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,

5: For the hope which is laid up for you in heaven, whereof ye heard before in the word of the truth of the gospel;
6: Which is come unto you, as it is in all the world; and bringeth forth fruit, as it doth also in you, since the day ye heard of it, and knew the grace of God in truth:

Job 32:8But [there is] a spirit in man: and the inspiration of the Almighty giveth them understanding.

Hbr 8:11And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest.

 

[Allan]

My statements may lead to an inaccurate accertion , but an accurate assertion . :smilewinkgrin: But perhaps my statements may lead to a fare deducktion . I'm getting the hang of your vocabulary .

Yeah, I got carried away with my C's.
But what can you expect I've been up for 18 hours and I've NEVER been great at spelling.
Thank God my salvation and theology is based on my spelling, huh? That is why I'm glad I have Word Perfect for writting important things that need correction.

 

[Rippon]

Regarding Titus 2:11 : has salvation been brought to all people ? By that term "brought" do you think that is the same as the Lord securing salvation for all ? Surely not Bob . The Lord has brought ( and shall bring ) salvation to everyone whose name is enrolled in the Lamb's Book of Life --- and no one else . All of that occurs because the Lord has bought His own -- the sheep , the church , the saints ( and dozens of other designations for the same people) with His precious blood .

 

[Brother Bob]

Again, not what the scripture says. Just as the light that lighteth every man that cometh into the world but men love darkness rather than light. Must of appeared to the ones in darkness also.

Jhn 1:5And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

It goes on and on Rippon.


Jhn 3:20For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
must know of the light before they can hate it.

Jhn 12:46I am come a light into the world, that whosoever believeth on me should not abide in darkness.


Rev 18:23And the light of a candle shall shine no more at all in thee; and the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride shall be heard no more at all in thee: for thy merchants were the great men of the earth; for by thy sorceries were all nations deceived.

Must of shined at one time to not going to shine no more in thee.

 

[webdog]

Then act like it. The things that you say are different than what is said here. You constantly set up straw men that Calvinism doesn't hold to. You defeat it admirably and are left with a handful of straw that no one held before and no one wants now. It's sad ... and it needs to stop.

Feel free to disagree with us. But don't make it up. That's all I am asking.

As you see, what you believe calvinism to teach is not what everyone believes calvinism to teach. I don't consider, for instance, me debating those who believe regenerations precedes faith to be setting up "strawmwen" if the argument has been made first. What's sad is the fact you belittle those who stand up to your position, something very unbecoming of a pastor.

 

[Pastor Larry]

As you see, what you believe calvinism to teach is not what everyone believes calvinism to teach.

Calvinism has certain sine qua non that are at issue. Address those. Calvinists differ on some things. You can address those, but don't pretend like you have refuted Calvinism because you argue against something that is not essential to Calvinism.

I don't consider, for instance, me debating those who believe regenerations precedes faith to be setting up "strawmwen" if the argument has been made first.

I don't either. So what you have just done is present a straw man, trying to pick a fight with me over something I don't disagree with you on.

However, what you need to realize is that Calvinism does not require regeneration preceding faith. That's a bit of a technical argument that won't floy well on the BB, but some Calvinists do not hold to regeneration preceding faith. They hold to an effectual call that enables belief that leads to life. Such an effectual call is not universal (that is, not given to all men without exception), it is unilateral (God's choice), and it certainly brings belief.

What's sad is the fact you belittle those who stand up to your position, something very unbecoming of a pastor.

I don't think I have belittled anyone. I have pointed out that on some of these issues, you are simply uninformed and unwilling to listen. If you were a student, you would get a failing grade. That's not belittling. As I told you privately, you have had the opportunity to learn and have refused. As I told you privately, for you to continue as you have is either the result of being untaught and uninformed, or being dishonest and unethical. I choose to believe that you are not dishonest and unethical. Therefore, the only option is for me to believe that you are untaught and uninformed.

For me to tell the truth about what I believe and what other Calvinists believe is not belittling you. You brought it on when you refused to listen and learn. Do you really believe I should stand by and let you misrepresent what I believe? Honestly, I could argue against Calvinism better than you are. And I am a Calvinist.

So again, my plea as always is for you to learn about Calvinism and address actual issues rather than ones you make up or create in your mind. My plea is for you to not misrepresent Calvinism. Is that really too much to ask?

 

[skypair]

Hi Larry,

Does Calvinism teach this? Or did you just make it up? I know of no Calvinist who teaches fatalism.

If there are not choices, that's the definition of "fatalism," Lar. In Greek mythology, Oedipus THOUGHT he was exercising his own free will but turned out, he wasn't. All was fated to happen. Same with Calvinism. No real choices -- all is fate. Please stop defending your theology long enough to give my assertion due consdieration.

This also is dishonest since not all Calvinists acknowledge that infants go to heaven. Secondly, you assume that Calvinism can't correctly answer this question. But such an assumption comes from your presupposition that you hold the correct answer. As we have shown, your position on the sinfulness and guilt of infants contradicts Scripture.

I know that -- but what does their theology dictate?? It dictates that they be condemned -- no, double condemned! Condemned on account of original sin/sin nature as Calvinists describe it and some are condemned because they are not baptized in the Reform church!

And your explanation of how they go to heaven is extrabiblical by your own admission. You beleive they go to heaven but you sure can't say why (unless I missed something you said). You said "special dispensation," right? Or something along that order without biblical foundation.

In Calvinism, the "way into the kingdom of Christ" is through grace alone by faith alone in Christ alone.

See, this is near perfect. It's what comes next that's suspect.

The gospel is the good news that salvation is available in Christ and is used to call all people to faith and repentance.

Calvinists don't call "all people," Lar. They call only those for whom Jesus died. Maybe you missed that in your catechism class, eh? And know what else? The "elect" never chose nor repent because that would be "meritorious works" and self-saving" on their part.

If you understood Calvinism, you would know that. As it stands, you are arguing against something that Calvinism doesn't believe.

Well, you may not believe that way -- I know many Calvinists are not aware of the more onerous aspects of that theology. But I think you would be agreeing with us against Calvinism if you thought they believed what we say they do, right?

Is it loving, in your book, to make up stuff about Calvinism? I don't think it is.

I've studied the 5 points -- the sovereignty issue -- the sin nature issue -- the sotierology -- the eschatology -- the covenant theology -- the historic record of Calvin and where he got his ideas -- read a few works of R.C. Sproul, Boice, some others. Friend, I don't know where you find me ignorant of Calvinism except in the fact that you disagree with me and agree with Calvinism. Is it loving, do you believe, to let a brother continue in error??

skypair

 

[skypair]

What they don't consider is that if He saved nobody He would be just. The only reason he saves anybody is because of His mercy.

J.D. -- Not now He wouldn't. Now there is a sacrifice for ALL sin and God would be unjust to condemn anyone -- who hadn't received Christ as Savior.

skypair

 

[skypair]

Yes , the Light ( Jesus , the Christ ) lightens every class of people -- all kinds of folks who are the elect . The Lord doesn't enlighten those who have never heard . And He doesn't enlighten those who have heard whom He withholds His saving power .

You're equivocating, my friend. The Bible doesn't suggest what you say here -- only Calvin does. Calvinism has special definitions for several words -- all, whosoever, election, foreknow, etc. They "fit" for Calvinists but those who CHOOSE Christ.

skypair

 

[skypair]

Larry

Here's the thing, Lar...

Honestly, I could argue against Calvinism better than you are. And I am a Calvinist.

If you don't believe some of the stuff the Calvin does, you're false advertising. Lay off the idea that you are a Calvinist, OK?

Being a Calvinist used to be "fashionable." It used to set you apart from those who were derogatorially called "Arminians." Those days are gone. What Calvinism should mean to you is what it means to the rest of us -- without the "cafeteria" picking and choosing of tenets that suit you. If you want to be really true to the Bible, just drop the labels. That's what I've done -- all but the monicher of "Christian" that is. :wink:

skypair