Calvinism vs Arminian is a worldview debate
- Thread starter mikedsjr
- Start date
OzSpen
Regular Member
- Oct 15, 2005
- 11,541
- 707
- Country
- Australia
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Private
Twin,
Please accept my apologies. You addressed those comments to ToBeLoved and not Blue. That was my error. However, my comments remain the same. What you did in what you said to ToBeLoved was inflammatory goading.
This is not helpful in a Christian conversation.
Oz
Upvote
0
OzSpen
Regular Member
- Oct 15, 2005
- 11,541
- 707
- Country
- Australia
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Private
I'm trying to explain to you that there are more than 2 worldviews and James Sire demonstrates this.
Do you never debate about issues involving, say, John Calvin's theology vs that of James Arminius - theologians who are very influential but are no longer with us?
Oz
Upvote
0
twin1954
Baptist by the Bible
ToBeLoved's post was inflammatory and goading and I was just pointing out the utter straw man and nonsense of it. Your apology is accepted. I hold no hard feelings toward anyone on these boards. I never get offended and I have a very thick skin.
At the same time I am not going to stand by and allow someone to misrepresent what I believe in order to paint it in as bad a light as possible.
Upvote
0
twin1954
Baptist by the Bible
I understand that is what you think but I disagree. When it is all boiled down into the foundational views that all theologies are built on there really is only two.
No I never do. I have read a great deal of John Calvin and not as much of Jacob Arminius and find them both to be in error in a very many things. I don't agree with my favorite theologian John Gill in some things. I don't debate the theology of men who cannot answer my argument. What I post are my own words and thoughts and not another's. I am ready to defend my views and will do so. I am not interested in what another person has to say just the one with whom I am engaged. If I want to read an authors writings I have a whole library full of books that I can read from not to mention the myriad digital books that I have easy access to.
My theology is not nor ever has been shaped by Calvin or Arminus but by prayerful study of the Scriptures and thoughtful reading of men's writings. I go to no one with a view to just simply agreeing with what they say because they happen to hold the same theological system that I do. I am a man called, prepared and placed by the Lord as a preacher/teacher of His Word. I am not a novice.
I will say that I have mellowed a bit though in my old age.
Upvote
0
OzSpen
Regular Member
- Oct 15, 2005
- 11,541
- 707
- Country
- Australia
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Private
This is simply not true. In foundational views, there are, for example:
- Christian
- Atheistic
- Agnostic
- Islamic
- Buddhist
- Hindu
- Jain
- Animistic
- Secular
- Humanist (incl. non-supernaturalist)
- Relativist
- Absolutist
- Etc, etc
So are you saying you are your own, autonomous theologian and your views are the only ones that are correct? Do you ever get into discussion in a Bible study group with anyone who doesn't agree with you? You are sounding very doctrinaire and dogmatic on this forum.
If you continue to take this kind of approach,
I can imagine more folks on this forum placing you on Ignore. I also have been prepared by God to be a teacher/preacher and I also am not a novice, but I wouldn't be so bold as to declare that 'I am a man called' and that means I cannot be questioned. What I've read of your posts of late does not indicate you have mellowed.
Oz
Upvote
0
OzSpen
Regular Member
- Oct 15, 2005
- 11,541
- 707
- Country
- Australia
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Private
I agree with your perspective of not tolerating inflammatory goading and building straw man fallacies. When you use language such as 'nonsense of it', that also can be an inflammatory response by you.
Upvote
0
twin1954
Baptist by the Bible
- And every one of them is based in a basic view of either man is in control of his destiny or God is.
Of course not. You are attempting to make a false claim by twisting what I said and ignoring the rest of it. I have read many theologians, including men such as Wesley and Finney. What I said was that I don't just read men with an accepting attitude of what they say simply because I agree with their theology. I think for myself and am guided by the light given me by the Spirit. I am not a parrot of anyone. Where men agree with the Scriptures I agree with them and where they don't I disagree. I often use the writings of men who I respect to keep me from going too far and to check that I am not being out of bounds in my views or interpretations.
No I don't because the Bible isn't a book that is subject to opinions and "what does this passage mean to you?" There is only one truth and one message in the Scriptures. I seek to find it and teach it to others. Bible study isn't a discussion group where everybody gets to tell what they think a passage means it is a time where a man who is called and gifted of God directs and teaches God's truth. Faithful men who are gifted to teach are a gift from Christ to His church. Eph. 4:7-13
There is nothing wrong with dogmatism. I know what I believe and why I believe it an am convinced that it is the truth of the Scriptures. If I didn't believe it to be true then I would have no basis for my faith. I certainly don't know everything that the Scripture have to teach me by the Spirit, in fact I am convinced that I will spend eternity learning more about Christ and His Gospel, but what I do know I am absolutely convinced is truth. I am sorry if you have a problem with that.
Only those who don't want truth. I have no control over that and if they want to ignore me they do so at their own peril.
Really? Did you call yourself or did other men? Did you prepare yourself or did the Spirit? Are you preaching? Many run who have never been called. I can know my calling for I didn't run into it I was put into it by God. I have never once sought out a position in order to be able to preach or teach. I have never once asked anyone to pay attention to what I say yet I have taught many over the years. People listen to me not because I am an eloquent speaker or interesting but because I speak the Word of God in the power of the Spirit leaving it to Him to apply it to the hearts of those who either read or hear what I say. One of the old Puritans, if I remember correctly, said that the same sun that melts the ice also hardens the clay. It isn't up to me to make the Word effectual it is up to Him who sends it forth.
I answer questions all the time. I am just not going to waste my time with questions intended to tell me what I ought to believe. I tell all who read or hear me to check it out by the Scriptures. My authority comes from Christ and if I am not teaching according to His Word don't believe me.
Oh but I have. Quite a bit in fact.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
twin1954
Baptist by the Bible
Calling a spade a spade may not be politically correct but it gets the point across. I am only antagonistic with those who make it known that they are first. I am really quite approachable if you approach with a stretched out hand rather than with a fist.
I admit that after all these years I tire of hearing the same straw men repeated over and over again against the truth that I rest my soul on.
Upvote
0
OzSpen
Regular Member
- Oct 15, 2005
- 11,541
- 707
- Country
- Australia
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Private
A view of the nature of human beings is only one dimension of a worldview. A worldview also includes:
- The nature of prime reality - what is really real;
- The nature of the world around us (external reality);
- What happens to people at death;
- How it is possible to know anything whatsoever;
- How to determine right and wrong;
- How to determine the meaning of human history.
Oz
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
twin1954
Baptist by the Bible
Oh I understand why you think the way you do. What you are ignoring is the fact that every view or combination of views is founded on either free will or God's sovereignty. When you believe that man has a free will it affects everything else you believe. You entire worldview is shaped by that foundation. When you believe in God's sovereignty it affects everything you believe and shapes your worldview as well. All of the worldviews you mention are based in either the idea of free will or God's sovereignty. You are the one who isn't listening. I challenge you to name a worldview that you think isn't based in one or the other and I will show you how it is.
Upvote
0
FaithfulPilgrim
Eternally Seeking
- Feb 8, 2015
- 455
- 120
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- US-Libertarian
I am a moderate Calvinist, but I prefer the term "reformed" as I don't want to be associated as a follower of John Calvin, only as a follower of Christ.
I consider Arminians as fellow brothers and sisters in Christ even though we may not agree with each other. The arguments between the two views is dividing the Church when we should look towards unity.
There is nothing wrong with adhering to either Calvinism or Arminianism, as long as we are not dogmatic about it. I don't think we are meant to know exactly how salvation is meant to work, rather our primary focus is to evangelize to the unsaved. We are humans, and we are prone to error, and it seems arrogant to assert one view has everything figured out.
There are things that both camps can learn from each other, and I have been thinking that we should work together to help us overcome the weaknesses of each view.
Neither view itself is heretical, only the extreme views on both sides are heretical.
I consider Arminians as fellow brothers and sisters in Christ even though we may not agree with each other. The arguments between the two views is dividing the Church when we should look towards unity.
There is nothing wrong with adhering to either Calvinism or Arminianism, as long as we are not dogmatic about it. I don't think we are meant to know exactly how salvation is meant to work, rather our primary focus is to evangelize to the unsaved. We are humans, and we are prone to error, and it seems arrogant to assert one view has everything figured out.
There are things that both camps can learn from each other, and I have been thinking that we should work together to help us overcome the weaknesses of each view.
Neither view itself is heretical, only the extreme views on both sides are heretical.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
In Post #79 on Page 4, I highlighted a technique that I have seen used many times in Evangelical circles:
In the interest of self improvement, I would like to refrain from such behaviour in future, behaviour I might add that I had no idea I was indulging in, if in fact I have been.
I therefore request that twin1954 present six highly definitive and relevant occurrences from among the many that are apparently peppered throughout my posts, together with the related post and page numbers.
By reviewing those occurrences presented by twin1954, I will be able to identify how my misdemeanors show themselves, and I should be able, on that basis, to rub sandpaper on the rough edges that give rise to them.
Wouldn't that be a good thing all around?
I added:
In response, in Post #82 on Page 5, twin1954 stated:
He seems to imply that I have been guilty of multitudinous misdemeanours of that kind, and that they have spanned many posts.
In the interest of self improvement, I would like to refrain from such behaviour in future, behaviour I might add that I had no idea I was indulging in, if in fact I have been.
I therefore request that twin1954 present six highly definitive and relevant occurrences from among the many that are apparently peppered throughout my posts, together with the related post and page numbers.
By reviewing those occurrences presented by twin1954, I will be able to identify how my misdemeanors show themselves, and I should be able, on that basis, to rub sandpaper on the rough edges that give rise to them.
Wouldn't that be a good thing all around?
Upvote
0
Similar threads
