Who is a Calvinist?

[Salty]

Are you a Calvinist? (there was multiple adds on the linked page )
Are you an Arminian and dont even know it?

I do wonder why some do not want to be call an Arminian or a Calvinist

This discussion should be limited as to why you are one or the other - or a combination.
and YES, "I don't know" is acceptable when applicable!
PLEASE do not complain about the shortcomings of the other side.
Lets keep this a very informative and civil discussion!

​

What a Calvinist believes

1. Total Depravity​

This belief posits that as a result of the Fall of Man, every aspect of humanity is tainted by sin. Thus, humans are incapable of coming to God without divine intervention. This perspective emphasizes that salvation is entirely God’s work.

2. Unconditional Election​

Calvinists believe that God has chosen, or elected, certain individuals for salvation without any conditions based on foreseen merit. This notion highlights God’s sovereignty in the salvation process.

3. Limited Atonement​

This principle states that Jesus Christ’s sacrificial death was intended specifically for the elect, ensuring their salvation. In contrast, some other Christian teachings argue for a general atonement available to all.

4. Irresistible Grace​

Calvinists assert that God’s grace to save a person cannot be resisted when it is extended. This belief underscores the notion that individuals are drawn to Christ through a powerful divine call.

5. Perseverance of the Saints​

Lastly, Calvinism teaches that those whom God has chosen will persevere in faith until the end. This assurance reinforces the belief in the stability and certainty of salvation for believers.


and extra;

Political Implications​

The tenets of Calvinism also influenced concepts of governance and civil responsibility. Calvinists were integral in advocating for democratic principles, promoting the idea that civil authority should reflect God’s justice.

Calvinism in Comparison to Other Protestant Traditions​

When discussing what a Calvinist believes, it’s crucial to understand how it compares to other branches of Protestantism, such as Arminianism. Unlike Calvinism’s deterministic approach, Arminianism
emphasizes human free will in accepting grace, providing an interesting anthropological divergence.

Comparatively, what is a Calvinist’s doctrine of predestination has sparked debates over free will in salvation. These differences highlight the diverse interpretations of scripture across denominations.

Calvinism vs. Arminianism​

• Predestination: Calvinists hold to unconditional election; Arminians believe in conditional election based on faith.
• Grace: In Calvinism, grace is irresistible; in Arminianism, one can resist divine grace.
• Salvation: Calvinists affirm the perseverance of the saints, while Arminians hold that one can fall from grace.

Conclusion​

Understanding what is a Calvinist opens up a wealth of theological insight and community dynamics. Relying on the doctrines established by John Calvin, Calvinists celebrate the sovereignty of God, the necessity of grace, and the assurance of salvation. Through practical application and community engagement, the teachings of Calvinism can enrich personal faith and foster a deeper connection to the broader Christian community.

There is much more on the link - click here for the link
(The main reason I copy and paste was that there was multiple adds on the linked page

 

[Salty]

This Table is from this link

Arminianism	Calvinism
Free Will or Human Ability	Total Inability or Total Depravity
Conditional Election	Unconditional Election
Universal Redemption or General Atonement	Limited Atonement or Particular Redemption
The Holy Spirit Can be Effectually Resisted	Irresistible Grace or The Efficacious Call of the Spirit
Falling from Grace	Perseverance of the Saints

 

[Van]

I am a one point Calvinist, but my point 5 doctrine is Preservation of the Saints based on 1 Peter 1:3-5.

I am a quasi two point Arminian, as I believe Christ died as a ransom for all people, 1 Timothy 2:6, and in Conditional Election, God choosing those who believe. I say "quasi" because I believe God chooses individuals for salvation during their physical lifetime, not before creation.

As to the points I believe that conflict with both Arminianism and Calvinism:
1) I believe lost unregenerate people can seek God and understand some spiritual things, the spiritual milk Paul used to speak to lost, unregenerate people. 1 Corinthians 3:1.

2) I do not believe lost unregenerate people need to be "enabled" in order to seek God or trust in Christ, see point one. Matthew 23:13 teaches lost people are able to be actually entering the kingdom, but can then be prevented by false teachings.

3) I believe the future is not fixed, i.e. totally predestined by God, but only partly predestined and partly open to alteration due to chance and human autonomous choice. Hebrews 11 teaches us of many historical events that were altered by the human choices of people "by faith" and not by predestined faithfulness.

4) I believe once God transfers a person into Christ, where they are born anew and sealed in Christ forever, they are saved forever and cannot lose their salvation or inheritance of eternal life. John 3:16.

 

[JonC]

I am neither.

The reason is I believe Calvin made a serious error long before Calvinists articulated the Five Articles and were declared unorthodox by other Calvinists who articulated the Canons of Dort in response. Both Calvinism and Arminianism are fruits of the same error. My disagreement with both happens long before TULIP or the Five Articles come into play.

 

[cjab]

I believe Calvin was a poor theologian, being more of a commentator on the theology of others than an original theologian. This is partly why he appears to contradict himself on key points, as also does Augustine, his hero. Sometimes Calvin appears as incoherent in the same paragraph, as he does in his commentary on 1 John 2:2.

On 1 John 2:2 ("Jesus Christ is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world"), Calvin affirms in his commentary: "Christ suffered sufficiently for the whole world, but efficiently only for the elect. This solution has commonly prevailed in the schools. Though then I allow that what has been said is true......" suggesting that propitiation for sin (as opposed to salvation) isn't limited to select persons.

Yet he appears to flatly contradicts this when he re-iterates his "other" well-known position: "[I believe] the design of John was no other than to make this benefit common to the whole Church" and that by whole, "[John] does not include the reprobate, but designates those who should believe as well as those who were then scattered through various parts of the world."

His latter position is deeply problematic, for if it was correct, no evangelist could ever truthfully say to an unsaved person, "Christ died for your sins," and many would spend their lives unsure of whether Christ did die for their sins.

So I find this baptistpress article to be unduly favorable to Calvin when it states without equivocation: "John Calvin discounted limited atonement, and Richard Baxter, John Bunyan, Jonathan Edwards and Andrew Fuller are just a few of history’s well-known Calvinists who likewise rejected this position."

I suggest John Calvin sat on the fence on limited atonement, embracing contradictory positions simultaneously, which is why I don't credit him as a serious theologian.

 

[JonC]

I suggest John Calvin sat on the fence on limited atonement, embracing contradictory positions simultaneously, which is why I don't credit him as a serious theologian.

To be fair to Calvin, the scope of the Atonement was an issue that grew out of his theology but also one that came about after his death. Calvin did not place divine sovereignty under soteriology (that was Beza, who followed Calvin).

 

[Charlie24]

Are you a Calvinist? (there was multiple adds on the linked page )
Are you an Arminian and dont even know it?

I do wonder why some do not want to be call an Arminian or a Calvinist

This discussion should be limited as to why you are one or the other - or a combination.
and YES, "I don't know" is acceptable when applicable!
PLEASE do not complain about the shortcomings of the other side.
Lets keep this a very informative and civil discussion!

​

What a Calvinist believes

1. Total Depravity​

This belief posits that as a result of the Fall of Man, every aspect of humanity is tainted by sin. Thus, humans are incapable of coming to God without divine intervention. This perspective emphasizes that salvation is entirely God’s work.

2. Unconditional Election​

Calvinists believe that God has chosen, or elected, certain individuals for salvation without any conditions based on foreseen merit. This notion highlights God’s sovereignty in the salvation process.

3. Limited Atonement​

This principle states that Jesus Christ’s sacrificial death was intended specifically for the elect, ensuring their salvation. In contrast, some other Christian teachings argue for a general atonement available to all.

4. Irresistible Grace​

Calvinists assert that God’s grace to save a person cannot be resisted when it is extended. This belief underscores the notion that individuals are drawn to Christ through a powerful divine call.

5. Perseverance of the Saints​

Lastly, Calvinism teaches that those whom God has chosen will persevere in faith until the end. This assurance reinforces the belief in the stability and certainty of salvation for believers.


and extra;

Political Implications​

The tenets of Calvinism also influenced concepts of governance and civil responsibility. Calvinists were integral in advocating for democratic principles, promoting the idea that civil authority should reflect God’s justice.

Calvinism in Comparison to Other Protestant Traditions​

When discussing what a Calvinist believes, it’s crucial to understand how it compares to other branches of Protestantism, such as Arminianism. Unlike Calvinism’s deterministic approach, Arminianism
emphasizes human free will in accepting grace, providing an interesting anthropological divergence.

Comparatively, what is a Calvinist’s doctrine of predestination has sparked debates over free will in salvation. These differences highlight the diverse interpretations of scripture across denominations.

Calvinism vs. Arminianism​

• Predestination: Calvinists hold to unconditional election; Arminians believe in conditional election based on faith.
• Grace: In Calvinism, grace is irresistible; in Arminianism, one can resist divine grace.
• Salvation: Calvinists affirm the perseverance of the saints, while Arminians hold that one can fall from grace.

Conclusion​

Understanding what is a Calvinist opens up a wealth of theological insight and community dynamics. Relying on the doctrines established by John Calvin, Calvinists celebrate the sovereignty of God, the necessity of grace, and the assurance of salvation. Through practical application and community engagement, the teachings of Calvinism can enrich personal faith and foster a deeper connection to the broader Christian community.

There is much more on the link - click here for the link
(The main reason I copy and paste was that there was multiple adds on the linked page

I joke around from time to time saying that I'm a 1 point Calvinist. I believe man is totally depraved, Isaiah and Paul made that very clear.

I reject the other 4 points as I see myself responsible before God for my actions, I chose of my own free will to believe and serve Him.

It's obvious to me, and the main reason I reject those 4 points, the Calvinists has no responsibility to God.

They didn't choose God, they had nothing to do with it. They are under no obligation, God bears the responsibility and obligation to them by choosing them.

God imputes to them their every move, how is it possible they are not robots?

I won't argue this, only giving the reasons why I'm not a Calvinist.

 

[JesusFan]

I am neither.

The reason is I believe Calvin made a serious error long before Calvinists articulated the Five Articles and were declared unorthodox by other Calvinists who articulated the Canons of Dort in response. Both Calvinism and Arminianism are fruits of the same error. My disagreement with both happens long before TULIP or the Five Articles come into play.

So what do you hold to, as Calvinism makes perfect sense to those of us jere who hold to us now being found in Adam spiritually dead, and whose only hope would be via the Atonement provided for us thru and by ther Cross of Christ?

 

[JesusFan]

I joke around from time to time saying that I'm a 1 point Calvinist. I believe man is totally depraved, Isaiah and Paul made that very clear.

I reject the other 4 points as I see myself responsible before God for my actions, I chose of my own free will to believe and serve Him.

It's obvious to me, and the main reason I reject those 4 points, the Calvinists has no responsibility to God.

They didn't choose God, they had nothing to do with it. They are under no obligation, God bears the responsibility and obligation to them by choosing them.

God imputes to them their every move, how is it possible they are not robots?

I won't argue this, only giving the reasons why I'm not a Calvinist.

We calvinists woudl agree with you view on this form of Calvinism that you are reacting against, as we do not hold to that form either

 

[JesusFan]

I believe Calvin was a poor theologian, being more of a commentator on the theology of others than an original theologian. This is partly why he appears to contradict himself on key points, as also does Augustine, his hero. Sometimes Calvin appears as incoherent in the same paragraph, as he does in his commentary on 1 John 2:2.

On 1 John 2:2 ("Jesus Christ is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world"), Calvin affirms in his commentary: "Christ suffered sufficiently for the whole world, but efficiently only for the elect. This solution has commonly prevailed in the schools. Though then I allow that what has been said is true......" suggesting that propitiation for sin (as opposed to salvation) isn't limited to select persons.

Yet he appears to flatly contradicts this when he re-iterates his "other" well-known position: "[I believe] the design of John was no other than to make this benefit common to the whole Church" and that by whole, "[John] does not include the reprobate, but designates those who should believe as well as those who were then scattered through various parts of the world."

His latter position is deeply problematic, for if it was correct, no evangelist could ever truthfully say to an unsaved person, "Christ died for your sins," and many would spend their lives unsure of whether Christ did die for their sins.

So I find this baptistpress article to be unduly favorable to Calvin when it states without equivocation: "John Calvin discounted limited atonement, and Richard Baxter, John Bunyan, Jonathan Edwards and Andrew Fuller are just a few of history’s well-known Calvinists who likewise rejected this position."

I suggest John Calvin sat on the fence on limited atonement, embracing contradictory positions simultaneously, which is why I don't credit him as a serious theologian.

He was perhaps the greatest non inspired theologian who ever lived though

 

[JesusFan]

I am a one point Calvinist, but my point 5 doctrine is Preservation of the Saints based on 1 Peter 1:3-5.

I am a quasi two point Arminian, as I believe Christ died as a ransom for all people, 1 Timothy 2:6, and in Conditional Election, God choosing those who believe. I say "quasi" because I believe God chooses individuals for salvation during their physical lifetime, not before creation.

As to the points I believe that conflict with both Arminianism and Calvinism:
1) I believe lost unregenerate people can seek God and understand some spiritual things, the spiritual milk Paul used to speak to lost, unregenerate people. 1 Corinthians 3:1.

2) I do not believe lost unregenerate people need to be "enabled" in order to seek God or trust in Christ, see point one. Matthew 23:13 teaches lost people are able to be actually entering the kingdom, but can then be prevented by false teachings.

3) I believe the future is not fixed, i.e. totally predestined by God, but only partly predestined and partly open to alteration due to chance and human autonomous choice. Hebrews 11 teaches us of many historical events that were altered by the human choices of people "by faith" and not by predestined faithfulness.

4) I believe once God transfers a person into Christ, where they are born anew and sealed in Christ forever, they are saved forever and cannot lose their salvation or inheritance of eternal life. John 3:16.

You are neither a classical Arminian nor a Calvinist though

 

[Charlie24]

We calvinists woudl agree with you view on this form of Calvinism that you are reacting against, as we do not hold to that form either

This thread is, as I consider it a safe zone.

I will kindly disagree.

I will say to all the Calvinists/Sovereign Grace, I'm not the enemy I just strongly disagree with your Doctrine.

You are just as much saved as any of us by grace through faith in Christ.

 

[Salty]

This thread is, as I consider it a safe zone.

Thank you!