Who is a Calvinist?

[JesusFan]

I am what many here would call a "Calvinist", as what I believe on each of the so-called "Five Points" matches them... at least in spirit, if not in letter.

My only misgiving in the OP is in the conclusion below:

There are actually those among professing Christians ( like myself ) who see the things that are termed "Calvinism" all by themselves in their own studies of His word... and have never relied upon the doctrines established by John Calvin and his successors to guide them or even to influence them in any way whatsoever.

Most, if not all, of us come from backgrounds that are "non-Calvinist" / "Arminian"/ "etc." in their origins;
With me personally hearing God's word and believing on Christ for the forgiveness of my sins in an independent Baptist Church that taught what many are now calling, "Provisionism".

While the teachings of "Calvinism" may, in most cases, mirror my own beliefs... they do not do so in their entirety.
But on the so-called "Five Points", they do indeed.


Regarding salvation, faith and the natural condition of man:

I do not agree with the teachings of Jakob Hermanszoon ( "Jacobus Arminius" ), whose followers presented their Five Articles of the Remonstrants to the churches of the Netherlands in response to the Belgic Confession;
I also do not agree with the teachings of John Wesley, who went on to found what would later be known as "Wesleyanism" and the Methodist Church, and those teachings are generally known today as modern "Arminianism";

Finally, I do not agree with the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church, whose views on salvation, etc. were codified by Luis de Molina and is generally known as "Molinism".

All comes back down to the basic issues of how badly did the Fall affect us, and does God require us to do anything additional to receiving Jesus as Savior and Lord by faith alone at all?

 

[JonC]

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

This entire forum should be a safe zone.

People should be able to disagree, express their beliefs strongly, and discuss their differences.

We live in a time where people want to shut down and silence opposing views, to stop all dialogue and vilify those who dare hold an opposing view. Unfortunately this applies to Chriatians as well.

 

[JesusFan]

Pretty much Scripture as it comes (as a narrative). The overall theme being "Christus Victor", which would exclude Calvinism and Arminianism by definition.

To give you an example - I believe that being saved from the wrath to come means that when that wrath comes we will be saved from it. This is based on 1 Peter 1 as well, so it is different from Preservation of the Saints in the readon we are saved (Preservation of the Saints is established on the other "points" of Calvinism).

Where does that wrath of God towards we as sinners go though, as someone has to face our due condemnation and judgement?

 

[JesusFan]

Contradiction and incoherence always lead to issues. And TULIP doesn't appear to resolve them. I would also discount "I" as a contradiction of the biblical record: irresistable grace in some cannot mean grace isn't resistable in others. "T" is framed wrongly: the issue isn't about "men coming to God," but about "man's response to God's coming to him." And if God comes to a man, as he does (as "in him we live and have our being" Acts 17:28) how can a mere theolgian place any human barrier between man and his maker? I only find "lost" respecting Christ's sheep, and "satan" respecting his own devotees. And hasn't the grace of God appeared to all men (Titus 2:11)? Again, what right does a theologian have to put qualifiers on election, so as to demand it be "U"? That election is conditional from a human perspective is inevitable, hence 2 Peter 1:10. That the saints may not always "P" is taken for granted in Galatians, and in many other places, and caught by the remark of Christ in Matt 24:12 respecting the "love of most growing cold." Biblical commentators have their place, but they should also know their place. Not sure that TULIP has a right view of its place in God's schema.

Who was to get saved by God and yet resisted that unto damnation then?

 

[JesusFan]

You are neither a classical Baptist nor a Baboon though.

Am a Calvinist Baptist

 

[Charlie24]

This entire forum should be a safe zone.

People should be able to disagree, express their beliefs strongly, and discuss their differences.

We live in a time where people want to shut down and silence opposing views, to stop all dialogue and vilify those who dare hold an opposing view. Unfortunately this applies to Chriatians as well.

I agree it can definitely go to far. Some are more oriented toward a brisk disagreement than others.

I sometimes wonder why the Holy Spirit omitted the details of that brisk disagreement between Paul and Barnabas.

 

[JesusFan]

I agree it can definitely go to far. Some are more oriented toward a brisk disagreement than others.

I sometimes wonder why the Holy Spirit omitted the details of that brisk disagreement between Paul and Barnabas.

They were probably arguing over which was the true Bible, 1611 or 1769?

 

[Charlie24]

They were probably arguing over which was the true Bible, 1611 or 1769?

LOL, maybe, Paul was given many future events, but I think it was more heartfelt and broader than that.

And I think we may be surprised if we could have heard that argument.

 

[JonC]

Where does that wrath of God towards we as sinners go though, as someone has to face our due condemnation and judgement?

??

That question does not make sence. Where does wrath go??

Wrath is not a material thing. It does not go anywhere.