What would be suggested Non Calvinist Systematic theology readings then?

[Van]

No, as we define total depravity as lost sinners will not accept coming to Christ to save them, but instead will try to get to God via religion of Good works and self righteousness

More fiction, more misrepresentation.

Did anyone say or suggest "coming to Christ" (meaning putting our faith in Christ) results in salvation? Nope

And still no acknowledgement of Christ died as a ransom for all, (Paul), false teachers prevented entry (Matthew), the rich young ruler sought eternal life (Mark), many seek the narrow door (Luke) Christ is the means of reconciliation (John), and we once were not a people (Peter)!

 

[Marooncat79]

Jesus Fan is correct

 

[JesusFan]

Jesus Fan is correct

See the discussion of Jesus and rich young ruler, as He wanted to come to God, but only on his terms as being wealthy and "doer of good works"

 

[Marooncat79]

See the discussion of Jesus and rich young ruler, as He wanted to come to God, but only on his terms as being wealthy and "doer of good works"

You miss the point

 

[Ben1445]

They would deny that!

I don’t think so. Calvin believed in baptism for regeneration. He believed that infant baptism washed original sin and you have to look back to it for your salvation. But I don’t expect many Calvinists have read that part of what he wrote. It’s not very popular considering Scripture says that the just live by faith and not infant baptism.

 

[JonC]

what would be their equivalent among non Calvinist Christians theology writers?

The Bible.

 

[JesusFan]

I don’t think so. Calvin believed in baptism for regeneration. He believed that infant baptism washed original sin and you have to look back to it for your salvation. But I don’t expect many Calvinists have read that part of what he wrote. It’s not very popular considering Scripture says that the just live by faith and not infant baptism.

We are Calvinist Baptists, so would agree with Calvin in regards to doctrines of Grace, but none in regards to his take on infant baptism and all aspects of his Covenant Theology?

 

[JesusFan]

You miss the point

Which was then?

 

[JesusFan]

The Bible.

ALL systematic Theology originates out from the bible, so what would be the non Calvinist counterpart to Calvin Institutes, or Erickson or Grudem Systematic theologies?

 

[Marooncat79]

https://www.amazon.com/Finneys-Systematic-Theology-Charles-Finney/dp/1556615140

 

[Marooncat79]

I have no clue why anyone would want to read that garbage though

 

[JonC]

ALL systematic Theology originates out from the bible, so what would be the non Calvinist counterpart to Calvin Institutes, or Erickson or Grudem Systematic theologies?

I was kidding. And systematic theology does not originated from the Bible.

Several good ones have already been mentioned.

Timpe is good from a free will perspective.
Finger from an Anabaptist perspective
MacGregor is good from an Arminianistic perspective

There are several Lutheran ones, Wesleyan ones, .....

 

[Van]

Christian doctrines, whether true of false, all claim to be based on the Bible. However, I provided six examples where Calvinist Theology conflicts with scripture, thus marking those parts as false.

No matter how many advocates of those false doctrines shout, I am right, you are wrong, they still cannot refute scripture, only rewrite it so it says something else, like those that seek to do not find did not seek. Utter nonsense.

 

[JesusFan]

I was kidding. And systematic theology does not originated from the Bible.

Several good ones have already been mentioned.

Timpe is good from a free will perspective.
Finger from an Anabaptist perspective
MacGregor is good from an Arminianistic perspective

There are several Lutheran ones, Wesleyan ones, .....

Thanks, have not read any of those listed here

 

[Alan Dale Gross]

The Bible.

ALL systematic Theology originates out from the bible, so what would be the non Calvinist counterpart to Calvin Institutes, or Erickson or Grudem Systematic theologies?

I have no clue why anyone would want to read that garbage though

I need to suggest that there can be no such thing as

Non Calvinist Systematic theology readings.​

I don't believe there is such a thing.

What you would have to have, if so, would be short and sweet, of this nature:

"Doctrine of Arminian Theology vs. the Word of God".

1. Proposition. “It is false to say that election is confirmed from everlasting.” —The
Remonstrance

 Biblical Response. Ephesians 1:4 “According as he hath chosen us in him before the
foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:”

2. Proposition. “It is certain that God determineth divers things which He would not, did not some act of man’s will go before it.” –The Remonstrance
Restated. It is certain that God has determined many courses of action, which He would not have decided upon unless some act of man’s free will motivated Him to action.

 Biblical Response. 2 Timothy 1:9 “Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy
calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which
was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,”

3. Proposition. “Some decrees of God precede all of the will of the creature, and some follow.” –Corv.

 Biblical Response. Acts 15:18 “Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world.”

4. Proposition. “Men may make their election void and frustrate,” –The Remonstrance

 Biblical Response. Isaiah 46:10 “Declaring the end from the beginning, and from
ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will
do all my pleasure:”

5. Proposition. “It is no wonder if men do sometimes of elect become reprobate, and of
reprobate elect.” –Welsin

 Biblical Response. Romans 9:11 “(For the children being not yet born, neither having
done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of
works, but of him that calleth”

6. Proposition. “Election is uncertain and revocable, and whoever denies it overthrows the gospel.” –Grevinch

 Biblical Response. 2 Timothy 2:19 “Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure,
having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity.”

7. Proposition. “Many decrees of God cease at a certain time,” Episcop.

 Biblical Response. Psalm 33:11 “The counsel of the LORD standeth for ever, the
thoughts of his heart to all generations.

Finis.

There is no need for them to bother other than as an embarrassment,
is the best they can do.

They are inconsequential, irrelevant, and unimportant heretics.

"A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject;" Titus 3:10.

What else are you going to do? They have no Bible standing.

Other than in contrived, fabricated, imaginary illusions exalting man over God.

No thanks.

 

[JonC]

I need to suggest that there can be no such thing as

Non Calvinist Systematic theology readings.​

There are plenty. Systematic Theology involves Scripture but like Calvinism it includes an evaluation of history, historical theology (the works of other theologians) and philosophy.

So there are a lot of Systematic Theologies out there.

Take Calvinism in general.

Is Calvinism God's Word? No.

Is Calvinism actually in the text of Scripture itself? No.

Does this mean Calvinism is incorrect? No.


What does Calvinism depend on other than Scripture?

1. Obviously it depends on a specific humanist judicial philosophy being correct as it establishes what divine justice requires.

2. It depends on Anselm's theory for a basic framework of Christ's purpose in dying for man.

3. It depends on Aquinas' philosophy of applied judicial punishment in a substitutionary role being correct.

4. It assumes the Jewish- Christian divide in terms of how salvation was viewed was identical to the Roman Catholic - Protestant divide.


One cannot read the Institutes and walk away not realizing the philosophy influenced Calvin's (and Beza's) theology.

The caution would be that there are a few extra-biblical assumptions Calvinism makes that, if wrong causes the whole house of cards to crumble.

BUT if right, this means it is a solid theology of interlocking doctrines.

 

[Alan Dale Gross]

What does Calvinism depend on other than Scripture?

It is interesting to see Total Depravity, on which 'Calvanism' depends, expressed in these Johnny-come-lately surmisings attempting to associate it with any other writer that ever came along and had some vague commonality with The Doctrines of Grace.

BUT if right, this means it is a solid theology of interlocking doctrines.

Right.